Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/09/2013 clarington Leading the Way GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE DATE: December 9, 2013 TIME: 9:30 A.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS AUDIO RECORD: The Municipality of Clarington makes an audio record of General Purpose and Administration Committee meetings. If you make a delegation/presentation to a General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting, the Municipality will be audio recording you and will make the recording public by publishing the recording on the Municipality's website. 1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER 2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING(S) (a) Minutes of a Regular Meeting of November 25, 2013 4-1 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS (a) Applications for Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision, Official Plan 5-1 Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment Applicant: Port Darlington Land Corporation Report: PSD-073-13 (b) Applications for Proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law 5-3 Amendment Applicant: Republic Live Inc. Report: PSD-074-13 (c) Applications for Proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law 5-5 Amendment Applicant: 668390 Ontario Limited (Kaitlin Corporation) Report: PSD-075-13 (d) Future Highway Closing — Unopened Road Allowances Situated in Lot 17, 5-7 Concession 5 Report: EGD-040-13 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 G.P. &A. Agenda - 2 - December 9, 2013 6. DELEGATIONS (Draft List at Time of Publication — To be Replaced with Final 6-1 List) (a) Sheila Hall, Executive Director, and Ron Robinson, President, Clarington Board of Trade, Regarding an Economic Update 7. PRESENTATIONS (a) Denny Bryan, Principal, Barry Bryan Associations (1991) Limited, Regarding Report CSD-010-13, Clarington Fitness Centre— Proposed Renovation 8. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) PSD-073-13 Applications to Amend the Clarington Official Plan and 8-1 Zoning By-law for a Draft Plan of Subdivision to Allow for Development of 253 Residential Lots Applicant: Port Darlington Land Corporation (b) PSD-074-13 An Application for a Clarington Official Plan'Amendment 8-17 and Rezoning to Allow Camping on Lands Adjacent to Canadian Tire Motorsport Park Applicant: Republic Live Inc. (c) PSD-075-13 Applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning 8-31 to Permit a Drive-Through Restaurant, a Restaurant, a Bank with a Drive-Through and Two Office Buildings, One with Ground Floor Retail and Restaurant Uses Applicant: 668390 Ontario Ltd. (Kaitlin Corporation) 9. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) EGD-040-13 Proposal to.Close and Convey Two Adjoining Right=of- 9-1 Ways Situated in Lot 17, Concession 5, Former Township of Darlington (Hampton) 10. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT No Reports 11. EMERGENCYAND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) ESD-007-13 Third Quarter Activity Report - 2013 11-1 12. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT See Report under Unfinished Business Section of Agenda G.P. & A. Agenda - 3 - December 9, 2013 13. MUNICIPAL CLERK'S DEPARTMENT (a) CLD-026-13 Clarington Volunteer Celebration Program 13-1 (b) CLD-030-13 Appointment to Clarington Museums and Archives Board 13-22 and Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee 14. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT No Reports 15. FINANCE DEPARTMENT (a) FND-018-13 Timing of South Bowmanville Mufti-Use Facility 15-1 (b) FND-019-13 Development Charges Act Consultations 15-6 (c) FND-020-13 Asset Management Plan — Roads and Bridges 15-42 16. SOLICITOR'S DEPARTMENT (a) LGL-012-13 Forced Road - 4826 Concession Road 6, Newtonville 16-1 17. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE (a) CAO-011-13 Sustainability Clarington Community Advisory Committee 17-1 Recommendation #1 Follow-Up 18. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (a) CSD-010-13 Clarington Fitness Centre — Proposed Renovation 18-1 (Referred from November 12, 2013 GPA Meeting) (b) Addendum Noise Fence for Lots on West Side of Vivian Drive 18-22 to PSD-072-13 19. OTHER BUSINESS 20. COMMUNICATIONS None G.P. & A. Agenda - 4 - December 9, 2013 21. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS (a) LGL-011-13 OMB Appeal of Front Ending Agreement with Green- Martin Holdings Ltd., Aspen Springs West Ltd., and West Diamond Properties Inc. Dated June 18, 2013 22. ADJOURNMENT Clarington , Leading the Woy General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 Minutes of a meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on Monday, November 25, 2013 at 9:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present Were: Mayor A. Foster Councillor R. Hooper Councillor M. Novak Councillor J. Neal Councillor W. Partner Councillor C. Traill Absent: Councillor W. Woo Also Present: Chief Administrative Officer, F. Wu Municipal Solicitor, A. Allison Director of Engineering Services, T. Cannella .Director of Community Services, J. Caruana Director of Planning Services, D. Crome , Director of Corporate Services & Human Resources, M. Marano Operations Supervisor, C. Peters Director of Finance/Treasurer, N. Taylor Director of Emergency & Fire Services, G. Weir Deputy Clerk, A. Greentree Committee Coordinator, J. Gallagher Mayor Foster chaired this portion of the meeting. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest stated at this meeting. ANNOUNCEMENTS Councillor Novak announced the following upcoming events: • Courtice Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony on November 28, 2013 from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at White Cliffe Terrace Retirement Residence. • 1St Annual Courtice Santa Claus Parade on Sunday, December 1, 2013. - 1 - 4-1 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 Councillor Partner announced the following upcoming events: • Time and Talent Auction on Wednesday, November 27, 2013 at the Newtonville United Church. • Orono Horticultural Society's Annual Meeting on Thursday, November 28, 2013 at the Orono United Church. • Kirby United Church Book Sale on Saturday, November 30,2013, from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. with proceeds to the "Move that Church" fund. • Santa's Breakfast on November 30, 2013 from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. at the Newcastle Community Hall. • 2nd Annual Orono Santa Claus Parade on Saturday, November 30, 2013. • Newtonville Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony on Sunday, December 2, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. at the Ida Brown Parkette. • Orono Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony and Moonlight Madness on Friday, December 6, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. at the Orono Town Hall. • Fun Triva Night on Friday, December 6, 2013 starting at 7:00 p.m. at the Newcastle Community Hall. • Breakfast with Santa on Saturday, December 7, 2013 from 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. at the Orono Town Hall. • Heather Rebekah Lodge's Annual Christmas Bazaar on December 7, 2013 from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Councillor Traill announced the Breakfast with Santa on Saturday, December 14, 2013 from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. at the Tyrone Community Centre. Councillor Hooper announced the following events: • Downtown Bowmanville's Annual Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony on Friday, December 6, 2013, starting at 6:30 p.m. Stores will remain open until 11:00 p.m. • Santa will be available every Saturday until Christmas, from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. at the Bank of Montreal parkette. • Clarington Board of Trade's 3rd Annual Men's Night & Pool Tournament on Wednesday, November 27, 2013 from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. • Veterans Walk and Roll Toy Drive on Thursday, November 21, 2013 to raise funds and toys for military families. More information can be found at www.friendsofveterans.ca. • Salvation Army Kettle Drive Kick-off at Wal-Mart on Saturday, November 23, 2013. - 2 - 4-2 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 Mayor Foster announced the following upcoming events: • Regional Municipality of Durham, in partnership with the Durham Purchasing Co-operative, is hosting a Supplier Information Night on Monday, November 25, 2013 from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 pm. at the Durham Regional Headquarters, 605 Rossland Road East, Whitby, 1st floor meeting rooms. • Blood Donor Clinic on Wednesday, November 27, 2013 from 1:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex. • Canadian Pacific Holiday Train will be at the Scugog and Wellington crossing on Thursday, November 28, 2013 at approximately 6:30 p.m. • Newcastle Lions Millionaires Night on Friday, November 29, 2013 • Trinity United Church Concert by County West on Friday, November 29, 2013 from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. • Christmas Bazaar and Home Show on Saturday, November 30, 2013 from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at the Kingsway Arms with proceeds to the Dimes 4 Times. • OPG Family Days: Lego Mania on Saturday, November 30, 2013 at the Sarah Jane Williams Heritage Centre. • A Country Christmas in Solina on Saturday, November 30, 2013 from 10:00 a.m. to 4:30 at the Solina Hall. • Annual Sports Day on Saturday, November 30, 2013, from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the Newcastle & District Recreation Complex. • Clarington Community Christmas Party on Sunday, December 1, 2013 from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Clarington Beech Centre. • Newcastle Recreation Complex Bake Sale on Sunday, December 1, 2013 from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. • Clarington Board of Trade Familiarization Tour on Friday, November 29, 2013. • Clarington Flames will be hosting Team China on Sunday December 1, 2013. MINUTES Resolution #GPA-550-13 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT the minutes of the regular meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on November 12, 2013, be approved. CARRIED - 3 - 4-3 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 PUBLIC MEETING (a) Subject: Applications to Amend the Zoning By-law 84-63 and Draft Plan of Subdivision Applicant: 2265719 Ontario Inc., 2084165 Ontario Limited and Kirk C. Kemp Report: PSD-065-13 Cynthia Strike, Planner, made a verbal an electronic presentation to the Committee regarding the application. No one spoke in opposition to or in support of the application. Kevin Tunney was present, on behalf of the applicant, to answer questions from the Committee. (b) Subject: Application to Amend the Zoning By-law 84-63 Applicant: Gwendolyn Thiele, 1361189 Ontario Ltd., Claret Investments Limited Report: PSD-066-13 Anne Taylor Scott, Planner, made a verbal an electronic presentation to the Committee regarding the application. Libby Racansky spoke in opposition to the application. Ms. Racansky noted that her comments pertained to Block 101. She explained that the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) recommends that Block 101 be required to have additional plantings, including butternut trees, and further that a holding symbol be in place until the planting plan has been implemented. Ms. Racansky stated that she supports all statements of the report especially the recommendations for the safety of the wetland. She asked the Committee to support/consider the following requests: • that the development application be put on hold until the planting plan (with extensive planning including butternut trees) is fully implemented to the satisfaction of CLOCA; • that the narrow dirt trail remain as such (which would promote infiltration of groundwater) within Block 101 along the fence; • that the sensor driven lighting of housing units at the rear yards be used rather than ordinary lighting and be installed at a 450 angle rather than a 900 angle; • that the woodland within the building block be cleared outside of breeding season or fall arrival of migratory birds; • that the impact of forest removal in Clarington in general as it pertains to air quality be considered; - 4 - 4-4 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 • that the impact on groundwater recharge and protection of housing from runoff; impact on provincially significant wetland with or without setback (i.e. trees, light, ecological functions) be considered; and • that the work of Friends of the Farewell and Black Creeks be considered. No one spoke in support of the application. Glenn Genge, Planning Consultant, D.G. Biddle & Associates, was present on behalf of the applicants to answer questions. Mr. Genge acknowledged that CLOCA has indicated that they are looking for a denser type of planting on Block 101. He added that the landscape architect is working with CLOCA to revise the planting plan. Mr. Genge acknowledged the issue of subsequent residential owners changing lighting. He noted that severance applications will be forthcoming for the remaining lots and explained that they are hoping that Mrs. Thiele's severance is not delayed by a holding symbol. (c) Subject: Application to Amend the Zoning By-law 84-63 and Draft Plan of Subdivision Applicant: Pollux Developments Inc. Report: PSD-067-13 Anne Taylor Scott, Planner, made a verbal an electronic presentation to the Committee regarding the application. No one spoke in opposition to or in support of the application. Mr. Anderson, representing the applicant, was present to answer questions. He confirmed that there are no significant wetlands on the subject lands. Mr. Anderson confirmed that the intention is that the lots will be fronting onto the major roads. DELEGATIONS DELEGATION OF SCOTT EBENHARDT & CHRISTINE ALBEE, CANADIAN DIABETES ASSOCIATION, REGARDING CLOTHING DONATION BINS Scott Ebenhardt & Christine Albee, Canadian Diabetes Association, were present regarding Clothing Donation Bins, explaining the handout he provided. Mr. Ebenhardt provided the Committee with background information on the Clothesline Program which collects clothing from clothing donations bins, with proceeds going to the Canadian Diabetes Association. He noted that it has been drawn to his attention, by the Planning Services Department, that the four Diabetes Association's clothing donation bins located within Clarington are permitted because they do not comply with the zoning by-law. Mr. Ebenhardt noted that there are 2100 bins located across Canada. He added that the four bins in Clarington provides approximately $33,000 of revenue per - 5 - 4-5 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 year to the Association. He explained the guiding principles of the program. Mr. Ebenhardt noted that the City of Hamilton and the City of Toronto had recently passed a resolution supporting the Diabetes Association bins through monitoring and enforcement. Resolution #GPA-551-13 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT the request, from the Canadian Diabetes Association to pass a by-law to amend the current Zoning By-law 84-63 to provide the Diabetes Association the ability to continue operations in Clarington with regard to clothing donation bins, be referred to Staff. CARRIED RECESS Resolution #GPA-552-13 Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the Committee recess for 10 minutes. CARRIED The meeting reconvened at 11:05 a.m. DELEGATION OF ROBERT STEVENS REGARDING REPORT EGD-035-13, BOWMANVILLE MUNICIPAL IDENTIFICATION DISPLAY Robert Stevens was present regarding Report EGD-035-13, Bowmanville Municipal Identification Display. Mr. Stevens explained that he is a great supporter of Bowmanville, the town in which he grew up. He noted that, driving from Toronto, there are eight decorative identification displays on Highway 401 which have municipalities names, not the name of the higher level of government. Mr. Stevens explained that in 1981 the Ministry of Transportation responded to correspondence indicating where signs can be located. He provided the example of Port Hope. Mr. Stevens therefore suggested that there should be no issue with erecting a Bowmanville sign. He explained that he wanted the sign to showcase Bowmanville to those travelling the 401. Mr. Stevens suggested that perhaps one of these newcomers might decide to start a new business in Bowmanville, which would help with the tax assessment base. He noted that Courtice and Newcastle are a different case in that they are completely north of Highway 401. Mr. Stevens stated that his cheque for$10,000 is still good for seed money for a Bowmanville decorative display on Highway 401. - 6 - 4-6 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 ALTER THE AGENDA Resolution #GPA-553-12 Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the agenda be altered to consider the EGD-035-13, Bowmanville Municipal Identification Display, at this time. CARRIED BOWMANVILLE MUNICIPAL IDENTIFICATION DISPLAY Resolution #GPA-554-13 Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Staff be directed to prepare a report on costs and design options with a maximum cost of$30,000, for decorative displays regarding "Bowmanville", at the east and west bound lanes at the Liberty Street exit; I THAT Staff be directed to liaise with Mr. Robert Stevens to explore possibilities of coordinating "in kind" donations for the display; and THAT Staff explore the possibility of relocating the proposed Waverly Road exit display to the Liberty Street exit. MOTION LOST LATER IN THE MEETING (See following motion) SUSPEND THE RULES Resolution #GPA-555-13 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT the Rules of Procedure be suspended to allow Members of Committee to speak to the matter of the foregoing Resolution #GPA-554-13 a second time. MOTION LOST The foregoing Resolution #GPA-554-13 was then put to a vote and lost - 7 - 4-7 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 Resolution #GPA-556-13 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report EGD-035-13 regarding Bowmanville Municipal Identification Display be received for information. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS There were no presentations. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPLICATIONS TO AMEND DRAFT APPROVED PLAN OF SUBDIVISION AND REZONING TO PERMIT ADDITIONAL LOTS WITH 11.3 METRES FRONTAGE APPLICANTS: 2265719 ONTARIO INC., 2084165 ONTARIO LIMITED AND KIRK C. KEMP Resolution #GPA-557-13 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report PSD-065-13 be received; THAT the applications to amend Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision (S-C 2007-0004) and rezoning (ZBA 2013-0022), submitted by Kevin Tunney on behalf of 2265719 Ontario Inc., 2084165 Ontario Limited and Kirk C. Kemp to permit additional lots with 11.3 metres of frontage, continue to be processed and that a subsequent report be prepared; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-065-13 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED - 8 - 4-8 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 AN APPLICATION TO REZONE LANDS TO ALLOW FOR THE CREATION OF 13 SINGLE DETACHED RESIDENTIAL LOTS APPLICANT: GWENDOLYN THIELE, 1361189 ONTARIO LIMITED & CLARET INVESTMENTS LIMITED Resolution #GPA-558-13 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report PSD-066-13 be received; THAT the application to amend the Zoning By-law, submitted by Gwendolyn Thiele, 1361189 Ontario Limited, & Claret Investments Limited to allow for the creation of 13 single detached residential lots, continue to be processed and that a subsequent report be prepared; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-066-13 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION AND REZONING TO PERMIT A 114 UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPLICANT: POLLUX DEVELOPMENTS INC. Resolution #GPA-559-13 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report PSD-067-13 be received; THAT the application for a proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision and rezoning, submitted by Pollux Development Inc. for the development of a 114 unit residential development, continue to be processed and that a subsequent report be prepared; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-067-13 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED - 9 - 4-9 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 DECLARATION OF SURPLUS PROPERTY PARTS 2 AND 3, REFERENCE PLAN 40R-22242 DARLINGTON BOULEVARD, COURTICE Resolution #GPA-560-13 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT Report PSD-068-13 be received; THAT Council declare the property identified as Parts 2 and 3 on Plan 40R-22242, Darlington Boulevard, Part Lot 35, Concession 2, former Township of Darlington, as shown in Figure 1 of Report PSD-068-13, as surplus and offered for sale with the conditions that a public walkway and inter-parcel vehicle access laneway be maintained; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-068-13 be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED REQUEST FOR COUNCIL SUPPORT RESOLUTIONS UNDER GREEN ENERGY ACT. ROOF-TOP SOLAR FIT PROJECTS AT 4532 HWY. 2 AND .9 NEWTONVILLE MILL ST., NEWTONVILLE Resolution #GPA-561-13 Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT Report PSD-070-13 be received; THAT Council approve the resolutions, contained in Attachment 1 of Report PSD-070-13, supporting the FIT applications by Elizabeth Anne Stapleton and Stapleton Auctions, at 4532 Hwy 2, Newtonville as follows: WHEREAS Elizabeth Anne Stapleton (the Applicant) proposes to construct and operate a rooftop solar array (the "Project") on 4532 Highway 2, Newtonville (the "Lands") in the Municipality of Clarington under the Province's FIT Program; AND WHEREAS the Applicant has requested that Council of the Municipality of Clarington indicate by resolution Council's support for the construction and operation of the Project on the Property; - 10 - 4-10 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 AND WHEREAS, pursuant to the FIT Rules, Version 3.0, applications whose Projects receive the formal support of Local Municipalities will be awarded Priority Points, which may result in the Applicant being offered a FIT Contract prior to other persons applying for FIT Contracts; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council of the Municipality of Clarington supports the construction and operation of the Project on the Lands; and THAT this resolution's sole purpose is to enable the Applicant to receive Priority Points under the FIT Program and may not be used for the purpose of any other form of municipal approval in relation to the Application or Project or any other purpose. THAT Council approve the resolutions, contained in Attachment 2 of Report PSD-070-13, supporting the FIT applications by Stapleton Auctions, at 9 Newtonville Mill St., Newtonville as follows: WHEREAS Stapleton Auctions (the Applicant) proposes to construct and operate a rooftop solar array (the "Project") on 9 Newtonville Mill Street, Newtonville (the "Lands") in the Municipality of Clarington under the Province's FIT Program; AND WHEREAS the Applicant has requested that Council of the Municipality of Clarington indicate by resolution Council's support for the construction and operation of the Project on the Property; AND WHEREAS, pursuant to the FIT Rules, Version 3.0, applications whose Projects receive the formal support of Local Municipalities will be awarded Priority Points, which may result in the Applicant being offered a FIT Contract prior to other persons applying for FIT Contracts; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council of the Municipality of Clarington supports the construction and operation of the Project on the Lands; THAT this resolution's sole purpose is to enable the Applicant to receive Priority Points under the FIT Program and may not be used for the purpose of any other form of municipal approval in relation to the Application or Project or any other purpose. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-070-13 be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED - 11 - 4-11 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 STREET NAME CHANGES IN THE CLARINGTON ENERGY BUSINESS PARK AND SOUTH SERVICE ROAD Resolution #GPA-562-13 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT Report PSD-071-13 be received; THAT the street name changes be approved; THAT the proposed By-law (Attachment 1 of Report PSD-071-13) be passed to rename Solina Road south of Highway 401 and the east-west segment of Osborne Road to Crago Road; THAT by-laws be forwarded to Council for the renaming of South Service Road and Courtice Road south of the Highway 401 interchange, at such time as the road construction is nearing completion as outlined in Section 3.5 of Report PSD-071-13; THAT property owners and business tenants receive a goodwill payment recognizing the inconvenience and time associated with the street name changes as identified in Section 4.1 of Report PSD-071-13; THAT a copy of Report PSD-071-13 and Council's decision be forwarded to the Durham Regional Police Service and the Region of Durham Planning and Economic Development Department; and THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED AS AMENDED (See following motion) Resolution #GPA-563-13 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT the foregoing Resolution #GPA-562-13 be amended by adding the following the second clause: "with the exception of the street name 'Megawatt Road'; THAT Staff be directed to report back on a suitable alternative road name for Council's consideration." CARRIED - 12 - 4-12 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 The foregoing Resolution #GPA-562-13 was then put to a vote and carried as amended. NOISE FENCE FOR LOTS ON WEST SIDE OF VIVIAN DRIVE Resolution #GPA-564-13 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report PSD-072-13, regarding a Noise Fence for Lots on the West Side of Vivian Drive, be referred to Staff to meet with the developer to discuss the situation. CARRIED ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT BOWMANVILLE MUNICIPAL IDENTIFICATION DISPLAY This matter was considered, following Mr. Steven's delegation, earlier in the meeting. This section of the Agenda is continued after the Confidential Reports section of the Agenda. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. Councillor Traill chaired this portion of the meeting. - 13 - 4-13 i General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 CLERK'S DEPARTMENT 2014 MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS —ADVANCE VOTING OPPORTUNITIES Resolution #GPA-565-13 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report CLD-031-13 be received; and THAT the by-law, establishing the hours and dates of the advance votes for the 2014 Municipal Elections, be passed. CARRIED Mayor Foster chaired this portion of the meeting. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT VALLEYS 2000 BOWMANVILLE CREEK FISH BY-PASS CHANNEL Resolution #GPA-566-13 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report COD-029-13 be received for information. CARRIED FINANCE DEPARTMENT INVESTMENT POLICY Resolution #GPA-567-13 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT Report FND-017-13 be received; and THAT the proposed updated Investment Policy as updated be approved. CARRIED SOLICITOR'S DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. - 14 - 4-14 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER There were, no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There were no items to be considered under this section of the Agenda. OTHER BUSINESS Councillor Partner announced that Newtonville Breakfast with Santa will take place on Sunday, December 1, 2013. COMMUNICATIONS There were no items considered under this section of the Agenda. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS NEWCASTLE FIRE HALL, 247 KING AVENUE EAST IN NEWCASTLE Resolution #GPA-568-13 Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT Confidential Report PSD-069-13 be received for information. CARRIED ENGINEERING SERVICES REPORTS - Continued REQUEST FOR REPORT REGARDING SIGNS FOR CLARINGTON AND INDIVIDUAL TOWNS AND GATEWAY FEATURES Resolution #GPA-569-13 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Staff be directed to prepare a report regarding opportunities for community gateway features. MOTION LOST - 15 - 4-15 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes November 25, 2013 ADJOURNMENT Resolution #GPA-570-13 Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT the meeting adjourn at 12:20 a.m. CARRIED MAYOR DEPUTY CLERK - 16 - 4-1 6 o. PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE OF COMPLETE AP: REPORT# PSD-073-13 Leading theYVay AND PUBL PORT DARLINGTON LAND CORP. The Municipality of Clarington has received Complete Applications for a proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment. APPLICANT: Port Darlington Land Corporation PROPERTY: Part of Lots 7-8, Broken Front Concession, Former Township of Darlington PROPOSAL: The proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision is for 257 units, including 169 lots for single detached dwellings, 44 lots for semi-detached dwellings (88 units), a stormwater management block, open space,parkland and related roads. The proposed amendment to the Clarington Official Plan and Port Darlington Neighbourhood Secondary Plan would have the effect of. • replacing the parkette block with a low density residential designation; . • adjusting the Type C arterial road alignment where it meets with East Beach Road; • reducing housing and population targets;and, • reducing,the arterial road width and eliminating the required centre median. The proposed amendment to the Zoning By-law would implement the proposed Draft . Plan of Subdivision. FILE NOS.: S-C-2013-0002,COPA 2013-0002&ZBA 2013-0028 A Public Meeting to receive input on the applications will be held.on: DATE: Monday,December 9,2013 TIME: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: Council Chambers,2"d Floor,Municipal Administrative Centre, 40 Temperance St.,Bowmanville, Ontario Additional information relating to the applications is available for inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (during,July and'August 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.) at the Planning Services Department, 3`d Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A6, or by calling Anne Taylor,Scott (905) 623-3379, extension 2414,or by e-mail at ataylorscottCa)clarington.net. If you cannot attend the Public Meeting on these applications,you can make a deputation to Council.Should you wish to appear as a delegation in respect to this item, arrangements should be made through the Municipality of Clarington Clerk's Department at(905)623-3379. In order to have your name appear on the agenda published on Thursday prior to the meeting, requests for delegations must be received by the Clerk's Department no later than 12 noon on the Wednesday prior to the meeting. Howevbr, requests for delegations will be accepted until 4:15 p.m. on the work day prior to the meeting and your name will be included on the final delegation list, printed Friday afternoon. An on-line delegation request form is also available on the Municipality's website,www.clarington.net under the Municipal Clerk's Department tab. If you wish to be notified of. i) the adoption of the proposed official plan amendmenttzoning by-law amendment or of the refusal of a request to amend the official plan/zoning by-law amendment; and/or ii) the decision in respect of the proposed plan of subdivision; you must make a written request to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department, APPEAL If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department before the proposed official plan amendment is adopted, before the by-law is passed, and/or before the approval authority gives or refuses to give approval to the draft plan of subdivision, the person or public body.' i) is not entitled to appeal the decision of Clarington Council to the Ontario Municipal Board,and ii) 'may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Daterlla thn Municipality of Clarington this 15'/`-day of ors. 2013. Davi .Crome,M.C,I.P.,R.P.P. 40 Temperance Street Director of Planning Services Bowmahville,Ontario Municipality of Clarington L1C 3A6 Cc: LDO 5-1 cn N Property Location Map(Bowmanville) N o C o � � ./VA?. W - U 2 Subject $ Site Lake Qntario w 5 ZBA 2013-0028 EAST BEACH ROAD y Zoning By-law Amendment COPA 2013-0002 Clarington Official Plan Amendment Lake Ontario S-C 2013-0002 Q Subject Lands Draft Plan of Subdivision ® Other Lands Owned By Applicant N Owner: Port Darlington Land Corporation I r PUBLIC MEETING ® REVI REPORT# PSD-074-13 REPUBLIC LIVE INC. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICA7lulus Lem"`g`he�ay AND PUBLIC MEETING The Municipality of Clarington has received Complete Applications for a proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment. APPLICANT: Republic Live Inc. PROPERTY: Part of Lot 1,Concession 8, Former Township of Darlington 5216 Darlington-Clarke Townline Road PROPOSAL: A proposed Clarington Official Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from General Agricultural to Green Space allowing,for recreational uses(camping) A proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to place lands in an appropriate zone to allow for camping, parking and washroom facilities on the subject lands, associated with music festivals on adjacent Canadian Tire Motorsport Park lands. FILE NOS.: ZBA 2013-0016&COPA 2013-0004 A Public Meeting to receive input on the applications will be held on: DATE: Monday, December 9,2013 TIME: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: Council Chambers,2nd Floor, Municipal Administrative Centre, 40 Temperance St.,Bowmanville,Ontario Additional information relating to the applications is available for inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (during July and August 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.)at the Planning Services Department, 3rd Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1 C 3A6, or by calling Anne Taylor Scott (905) 623- 3379, extension 2414 or by e-mail at ataylorscott @clarington.net. If you cannot attend the Public Meeting on these applications, you can make a deputation to Council. Should you wish to appear as a delegation in respect to this item, arrangements should be made through the Municipality of Clarington Clerk's Department at (905) 623-3379. In order to have your name appear on the agenda published on Thursday prior to the meeting, requests for delegations must be received by the Clerk's Department no later than 12 noon on-the Wednesday prior to the meeting. However, requests for delegations will be accepted until 4:15 p.m. on the work day prior to the meeting and your name will be included on the final delegation list, printed Friday afternoon. An on-line delegation request form is also available on the Municipality's website, www.clarington.net under the Municipal Clerk's Department tab. If you wish to be notified of the adoption of the proposed official plan amendment/zoning by-law amendment or of the refusal of a request to amend the official planlzoning by-law amendment you must make a written request to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department. APPEAL If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department before the proposed Official Plan Amendment is adopted,and/or before the by-law is passed, the person or public body., i) is not entitled to appeal the decision of Clarington Council to the Ontario Municipal Board,and fl) may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Dated Athe Municipality of Clarington this f3ik day of n!o 2013. David Crome, M.C.I.P.,R.P.P. 40 Temperance Street Director of Planning Services Bowmanville,Ontario Municipality of Clarington L1C 3A6 Cc: LDO 5-3 cn I Property Location Map(Darlington) r) z REGIONALROAD J � N U ❑ 0 Q z O O Subject _ Site a REGIONAL ROAD 20 ° ' 3 ROAD 0 tU S EL aREGIONAL ROAD 20 0 _ � a CONCESSION ROAD 10 � � rc ION RDA D,7 4UNN RO ¢O W Z J � i z o CO*PA 2013-0004 w Caarington Official Plan Amendment ❑ Y , Y O Of U w° m o ZBA 2013-0016 z Zoning By-law Amendment J - ' Q CONCESSION ROAD 8 Applicant: Republic Live Inc I PUBLIC MEETING REPORT# PSD-075-13 I� �® NOTICE OF COMPLETI 66390 ONT. LTD. KAITLIN CORP. ®l1 AND PUBLIC MEETING Leadtng the Way The Municipality of Clarington has received Complete Applications for a proposed Official Plan Amendment and-Zoning By-law Amendment. APPLICANT: 668390 ONTARIO LIMITED(KAITLIN CORPORATION) PROPERTY: 1 MARTIN ROAD BOWMANVILLE (SOUTH WEST CORNER OF DURHAM HIGHWAY 2 AND REGIONAL ROAD 57) PROPOSAL: TO AMEND THE CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW TO PERMIT A DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANT, A RESTAURANT, A BANK WITH A DRIVE-THROUGH AND TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS, ONE WITH GROUND FLOOR RETAIL AND RESTAURANT USES FILE NOS.: COPA 2013-0003;ZBA 2013-0029 A Public Meeting to receive input on the applications will be held on: DATE: • Monday, December 9,2013 TIME: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: Council Chambers,2nd Floor,Municipal Administrative Centre, 40 Temperance St., Bowmanville,Ontario Additional information relating to the applications is available for inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Planning Services Department, 3`d Floor,40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A6, or by calling Ruth Porras (905)623-3379, extension 2412 or by e-mail at rporras @clarington.net. Further details can be found on our website at www.clarington.net. If you cannot attend the Public Meeting on these applications, you can make a deputation to Council. Should you wish.to appear as a delegation in respect to this item, 'arrangements should be made through the Municipality of Clarington Clerk's Department at (905) 623-3379. In order to have your name appear on the agenda published on Thursday prior to the meeting, requests for delegations must be received by the Clerk's Department no later than 12 noon on the Wednesday prior to the meeting. However, requests for delegations will be accepted until 4:15 p.m. on the work day prior to the meeting and 'your name will be included on the final delegation list, printed Friday afternoon. An on-line delegation request form is also available on the Municipality's website, www.clarington.net under the Municipal Clerk's Department tab. If you wish to be notified of the adoption of the proposed Official Plan amendment/Zoning By-law amendment or of the refusal of a request to amend the Official Plan/Zoning By-law amendment; you must make a written request to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department. APPEAL If a person or public.body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department before the proposed Official Plan amendment is adopted,and/or before the by-law is passed, the person or public body: i) is not entitled to appeal the decision of Clarington Council to the Ontario Municipal Board,and ii) may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Dated at the Municipality of Clarington this nday of NdJ• 2013. David J. Crome,M.C.I.P.,R.P.P. 40 Temperance Street Director of Planning Services Bowmanville,Ontario Municipality of Clarington L1C 3A6 cc: LDO 5-5 Property Location Map(Bowmanviile) N, Durham Highway 2 F Q ;s h Restaurant ° o i Bank Restaurant i Subject o n Site w � o o p❑ d d dM DURHAM HIGHWAY 2 4 ° 70 6 p0 6 CQ a o 0 3 Storey ®d 4 ° �F2etail! • �� Restaurant/ Office% o 90 rLLL 0 .ww` 2 Store d d Iy i off,66 0 is ZBA 2013-0029 .I ..l L..LL_ C 'Do Zoning By-law Amendment Q) COPA 2013-0003 Clarington Official Plan Amendment Future Prince William Boulevard I IV Owner: 668390 ONTARIO LTD I co I PUBLIC MEETING REPORT# EGD-040-13 Road Allowance to be UPOPENED ROAD ALLOWANCES HAMPTON Closed (5m x 150m) Y yon yyN 7� 2pd d p y� >Q 3 p� o� �PN� Road Allowance to be ��o�N o y Closed I (9.1 m x 523 m) N o y EoM0NSON y y Applicant's 6 Lands 7d y d 5� off` s NOTICE OF INTENTION TO PROCEED WITH FUTURE HIGHWAY CLOSING UNOPENED ROAD ALLOWANCES SITUATED IN LOT 17, CONCESSION 5 IN THE FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON Take Notice that the General Purpose and Administration Committee of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington, at the meeting to be held in the Council Chambers, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario on December 9, 2013 at 9:30 a.m. intends to pass a by-law to stop up and close unopened road allowances situated in Lot 17, Concession 5 in the former Township of Darlington, now in the Municipality of Clarington. And Further Take Notice That before passing the said by- law, the committee of Council shall hear.in person, or by his Counsel, Solicitor or Agent, any person who claims that his land will be prejudicially affected by this future by-law and who applies to be heard. Patti L. Barrie,CMO Municipal Clerk Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A6 5-7 DRAFT LIST OF DELEGATIONS GPA Meeting: December 9, 2013 (a) Sheila Hall, Executive Director, and Ron Robinson, President, Clarington Board of Trade, Regarding an Economic Update 6-1 Clarbgton REPORT PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT PUBLIC MEETING Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: PSD-073-13 File#: COPA 2013-0002, ZBA 2013-0028 & S-C-2013-0002 Subject: APPLICATIONS TO AMEND THE CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW FOR A PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION TO ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 253 RESIDENTIAL LOTS APPLICANT: PORT DARLINGTON LAND CORPORATION RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-073-13 be received; 2. THAT the applications to amend the Clarington Official Plan (COPA 2013-0002) and Zoning By-law (ZBA 2013-0028) and for a proposed Draft Plan of , Subdivision (S-C-2013-002), submitted by Port Darlington Land Corporation, continue to be processed and that a subsequent report be prepared; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-073-13 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: av J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Franklin Wu Director, Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer ATS/CP/df 3 December 2013 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 8-1 REPORT NO.: PSD-073-13 PAGE 2 1. APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: Port Darlington Land Corporation 1.2 Proposed Official Plan Amendment (Attachment 1): To amend the Clarington Official Plan and Port Darlington Neighbourhood Secondary Plan by: • Replacing the parkette block with a low density residential designation; • Adjusting the Type C arterial road alignment where it meets East Beach Road; • Reducing housing and population targets for the neighbourhood; and • Reducing the arterial road width and eliminating the required centre median. 1.3 Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment: To place lands in appropriate zones to implement the proposed draft plan of subdivision. 1.4 Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision (Figure 2): To permit the development of 253 residential units comprised of the following: • 53 single detached lots with10.0 metre frontages; • 41 single detached lots with 11.3 metre frontages; • 75 single detached lots with 13.7 metre frontages; 42 semi-detached lots (84 units) with 13.7 metre frontages (6.85 metre frontage) for each unit); and • Parkland, open space, a stormwater management block; roads and related services. 1.5 Area: 18.49 hectares 1.6 Location: Part of Lots 7 and 8, Broken Front Concession, Former Township of Darlington 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 The subject applications were deemed complete November 15, 2013. The following studies and reports were submitted with the application and circulated for comments: • Planning Justification Report • Environmental Impact Study • Functional Servicing Report Update • Energy Conservation and • Shoreline Erosion Hazard Sustainability Plan Assessment • Traffic Impact Study 8-2 REPORT NO.: PSD-073-13 PAGE 3 • Meander Belt Width • Noise Study Assessment • Archaeological Study • Financial Impact Statement 2.2 The subject lands are part of a larger land holding (approximately 45 hectares) owned by Port Darlington Land Corporation (PDLC) between Bennett Road and Port Darlington Road, south of the CN Railway. 2.3 The subject development application is located on 18.49 hectares of land, west of Lambs Road, and west of Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision S-C-2002-002 which was draft approved in February 2012. For ease of writing this report the draft approved lands (S-C-2002-002) will be referred to as the PDLC East lands, while the subject lands (S-C-2013-0002) will be referred to as the PDLC West lands. See Figure 1. 2.4 The original application (S-C-2002-002) proposed 699 residential units across the entire PDLC land holdings (approximately 45 ha). The development was determined to be premature on the basis that the development would accelerate growth beyond the Municipality's ability to service the subject lands. At the time, in November 2008, the following projects required significant investment beyond the 10 year capital works forecast in order to facilitate the proposal specifically: • grade separations at rail crossings along Port Darlington Road and Bennett Road; • improvements to the Lambs Road underpass at the CN Railway; • improvements to the surrounding road networks and specifically the intersections of: Baseline Road/Liberty Street, Highway 2/Bennett Road, and Liberty Street/Lake Road; and • erosion control and mitigation. 2.5 Following much discussion and negotiation, the PDLC East lands received draft approval, on consent by both parties, at the Ontario Municipal Board for 850 medium and high density residential units. The conditions of approval allow only the first phase (424 medium density units) closest to Bennett Road to be constructed prior to the construction of additional municipal infrastructure, including the full reconstruction of the Lambs Road grade separation at the railway to accommodate two-way traffic and emergency vehicles. Approving development at the furthest point east would encourage the use of Bennett Road, versus reliance on Port Darlington Road, Lake Road and Liberty Street where capacity to accommodate the traffic is considered to be limited. 2.6 Other key conditions of approval to allow Phase 1 of the PDLC East lands to proceed include: • Construction of a continuous waterfront parkway to connect Bennett Road to Port Darlington Road (prior to 101St unit) 8-3 REPORT NO.: PSD-073-13 PAGE 4 • Improvements to Bennett Road, including improvements at the level CN crossing • Improvements to the CN railway overpass at Lambs Road, including signalization/gating for the one-way operation • Preparation and implementation of a bluff access management plan Figure 1 Lands Owned by Port Darlington Land Corporation s t 5 e � 1 F � ' E H*4,VAYAO 1•;PoW II+UHI4Ayk i W if.Y4l•10! u H'QI 6 M1/FYa01 Y ;,;,,;;; CN Railway Overpass at Lambs Road PDLC West Lands _ i._;t Q (Subject Lands) r g rig„'i APA QlSRY 3 D ” n�r� ? - ---- .va.o�c,.-� 42OL S tAEgvIe DENSm' ..• F ----------- 'Y.M111Q1P�PAftth1Q!(5 B!OCK I f Re-Aligned East Beach Road PDLC East Lands Lnhc Ontario N 8-4 m v O I � F SITF N CL DRAFT PLAN O w _ roH P•uT or _a-s a —� - HHCS-`J WONT I ` I&NIC-AL TY Or CLARINCTON (D - - RzOOK 1 MUNICIPAI Itt OF MIIP.HAM Q i �ee0 WAITER P0'U'TION t o. "') 0.°` T, -n COAlTROI'P[ANT o o °• :zii'j 9c;:4 N OVEDPLA `''�. 0o f r "° I•" O � ^e rl K. S-62602 002 1 I O ' I � ..( •�a�� " `�.; DIY .D]tTOxK I^LDW/TDx6* � , WATER TREATMENTPLANY CL � I — — _ � c�.tcnolvJ4'icmlP.m:m,• .. �.. � !;' °A All —nraEur Bacn Rwo ------- — .`_•.. ��\`_, (� , L6 'J'`,Ja.2^� ._ _I .w„gfada.a,aounxaoaa:;, _ ••. . . .•:-I I ' _. ..- , r.' ro.,-�...u. � Q1 , " PORT DARLINGTON(West) DP•1K D O m 00 I REPORT NO.: PSD-073-13 PAGE 6 2.7 As a result of the commencement of the waterfront park construction and relocation of East Beach Road in 2013, the landowner requested a preconsultation meeting with staff in early 2013 with a preliminary concept for the PDLC West lands, with the intention of starting development on PDLC West lands, instead of Phase 1 of the PDLC East lands. 3. LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The subject lands are currently under agricultural production and contain an existing residential dwelling, agricultural buildings and buildings accessory to the dwelling. A private forced road connects East Beach Road to Lambs Road and South Service Road. The forced road is maintained on a year round basis. Just to the east of the limits of the proposed draft plan of subdivision, Bennett Creek flows southerly into Lake Ontario. 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North - Canadian National Railway and the hydro electric transmission corridor (Hydro One Networks Inc.) South - Existing residences fronting on East Beach Road East - Draft approved Plan of Subdivision S-C-2002-002 West - The Region of Durham Water Pollution Control Plant and the Water Treatment Plant 4. PROVINCIAL POLICY 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth. Land use patterns shall be based on densities and a mix of land uses which efficiently use land, resources and infrastructure and other public services. A full range of housing types and densities are to be provided to meet the projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area. The PPS encourages a compact built form which supports the development of transportation systems that minimize the length and number of vehicle trips and also supports the development of viable choices and plans for public transit. 4.2 Provincial Growth Plan The Growth Plan requires municipalities to manage growth, and encourages the creation of complete communities that offer a mix of land uses, employment and housing options, high quality open space, and access to stores and services. Natural heritage features that complement, link or enhance natural systems shall be identified and protected. 8-6 REPORT NO.: PSD-073-13 PAGE 7 The subject lands are within the defined built-up area of Bowmanville. By 2015, a minimum of 40 per cent of all residential development occurring annually will be within the built-up area, measured across the Region of Durham. 5. OFFICIAL PLANS 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands "Living Area" and "Major Open Space —Waterfront". The predominant use of lands within the Living Area designation shall be for housing purposes. An Environmental Impact Study is required prior to development in the Major Open Space system to ensure that the environmentally sensitive areas are not negatively impacted. There is specific recognition of the Port Darlington area as a Waterfront Place. The predominant use of lands in the Waterfront designation may include marina, recreational, tourist, and cultural and community uses. Residential and employment opportunities may be permitted, which support and complement the predominant uses. The scale of such development can be detailed in the respective local official plans. 5.2 Clarington Official Plan Clarington Official Plan designates, the subject lands as Waterfront Greenway, Urban Residential with a District Park on the Lake Ontario shoreline at the mouth of the Bennett Creek and Environmental Protection Area. A Type C Arterial Road is designated through the subject lands. In addition to the existing grade separation at Lambs Road, future grade separations at Liberty Street and Bennett Road are identified. The construction of future grade separations is expensive and thus the Plan states that they shall be constructed on a priority basis considering need and financing. The Bennett Creek is an identified Natural Heritage Feature. There is a Regulatory Shoreline Area adjacent to Lake Ontario. The Clarington Official Plan also recognizes the Lake Ontario Waterfront as a unique and dynamic feature and a vital public resource. The continuation of the Waterfront Trail for such purposes as walking and cycling is required along the Lake Ontario Waterfront. The Official Plan also contains policies regarding the extension of public infrastructure and services to accommodate growth in an orderly and cost—efficient manner. The Port Darlington Neighbourhood Secondary Plan provides a more detailed land use plan for this area. The Waterfront Greenway with the Waterfront Trail, and the District Park is designated along the Lake Ontario shoreline. A parkette is also shown on the subject lands adjacent to the designated Open Space areas adjacent to the CNR tracks. The majority of the lands are designated Low Density Residential, with several areas of Medium Density Residential and one High Density Residential Block. 8-7 REPORT NO.: PSD-073-13 PAGE 8 The Port Darlington Neighbourhood has a housing target of 1,225 units, consisting of 275 low density, 500 medium density, 425 high density and 25 units for intensification. Any application for residential development must be assessed in accordance with the growth management principles identified in the Official Plan; and the provision of municipal services and facilities of the Port Darlington Neighbourhood Secondary Plan. An application to amend the Clarington Official Plan and the Port Darlington Neighbourhood Secondary Plan was submitted and is included as Attachment 1. 6. ZONING BY-LAW 6.1 Zoning By-law 84-63 zones the majority of the subject lands in an Agriculture (A) zone category. The lands adjacent to shoreline area are zoned Environmental Protection (EP). The proposed residential development does not conform to the current Zoning By-law provisions and as such a rezoning application to implement the proposed draft plan of subdivision was submitted concurrently with the draft plan of subdivision. 7. PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS '7.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject site and three (3) public meeting notice signs were installed on the lands. 7.2 At the time of writing this report, one neighbouring property owner attended the Planning counter to'obtain more information about the proposed development. 8. AGENCY COMMENTS 8.1 CN Railway CN has provided a copy of the main line requirements to the applicant, and provisions, such as warning clauses, will be included in the subdivision agreement. CN accepts the findings of the servicing and noise reports, however, would like an opportunity to further review these issues at the detailed design stage. 8-8 REPORT NO.: PSD-073-13 PAGE 9 8.2 Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board The public school board has no objections. Students generated by this development would attend Central Public School and/or Vincent Massey Public School, and Bowmanville High School. 8.3 Veridian Connections Veridian has indicated that expansion/upgrades to the service are required to accommodate this development. Technical comments have been provided to the applicant for their consideration during the detailed design stage. The applicant will be required to make an application to Veridian to service the site. 8.4 Other agencies Rogers has no objections to the proposal. Comments from other circulated agencies, including the Region of Durham and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, have not yet been received and will be reviewed in a subsequent report. 9. DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS 9.1 Engineering Services 'Engineering Services has provided the following preliminary comments and items to address prior to recommending approval of the development: Phasin The phasing of the entire PDLC holdings will require further review to ensure development in the neighbourhood occurs sequentially considering necessary improvements to the road network and financial impacts. Road network and Traffic The Traffic Impact Study is currently under review. The development must provide connectivity to Bennett Road and connectivity to Port Darlington Road. The applicant will be responsible for all costs to implement the recommendations of the traffic study. The applicant will also be responsible to implement identified improvements to the surrounding road network to accommodate this development, including upgrades to Bennett Road and the level railway crossing and the Lambs Road grade separation at the railway. The applicant will be required to provide continued access to existing residents in the area of the development. Proposed alignments and configuration require further review with the applicant. Servicing, Grading and Stormwater Management The submitted Conceptual Servicing and Stormwater Management Report have provided preliminary details on servicing, grading and stormwater management. The detailed design will require approval by Engineering Services and CLOCA. 8-9 REPORT NO.: PSD-073-13 PAGE 10 Shoreline The shoreline hazard limit must be approved by CLOCA. The applicant will be required to implement a bluff access management plan as a condition of approval. Other Other items, including on-street parking, noise attenuation, trails/parkland will be part of the detailed review of this development once the principle of development has been reviewed and accepted. 9.2 Emergency and Fire Services Clarington Emergency and Fire Services Department have noted the need for a secondary access point for emergency purposes. 9.3 Finance Department The Financial Impact Study is currently under review and comments will be detailed in a future staff report. 10. DISCUSSION 10.1 The Official Plan and Port Darlington Neighbourhood Secondary Plan designate the subject lands for urban development and highlight the importance of establishing a continuous waterfront greenway, including the provision of a park system that can provide a wide range of outdoor and recreational opportunities to the residents of Clarington. 10.2 Further discussion will be required with the proponent to address the details of the proposal and other matters such as: • The phasing and timing of development in the Port Darlington Neighbourhood; • Whether the transportation and infrastructure concerns identified in consideration of S-C-2002-002, can be mitigated and resolved to allow development to occur on the PDLC West lands in advance of the PDLC East lands; and • Whether the Port Darlington Neighbourhood can proceed in an efficient and cost effective manner without putting undue financial burden on the Municipality, and without risking public health and safety 10.3 At this time, comments from a number of key departments and agencies are outstanding. The purpose of the public meeting is to gather input from the public. A future report will be drafted to provide a recommendation on the applications. 11. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 8-10 REPORT NO.: PSD-073-13 PAGE 11 12. CONCLUSION 12.1 The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the applications submitted by Port Darlington Land Corporation for the Public Meeting under the Planning Act. It is recommended that the applications to amend the Clarington Official Plan and implementing Zoning By-law and the proposed draft plan of subdivision continue to be processed, including the preparation of a subsequent report considering all agency comments and concerns raised at the Public Meeting. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Anne Taylor Scott, Planner II Attachments: Attachment 1 - Proposed Official Plan Amendment List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Port Darlington Land Corporation c/o Kelvin Whalen Kevin Taylor 8-11 ATTACHMENT _REPORT_PSD-073-13 AMENDMENT NO. TO THE CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN PURPOSE: The purpose of this Amendment is to adjust the road pattern, distribution of land uses and housing targets as they apply to the Port Darlington Neighbourhood Second Plan Area. BASIS: The basis of this amendment is as follows: This amendment is based on an application from the property owner of the subject lands for approval of a Draft Plan of Subdivision. Through the design process for the plan of subdivision, certain adjustments to the Secondary Plan became necessary. ACTUAL AMENDMENT: The Clarington Official Plan is hereby amended as follows: 1, By amending Table 9-2 Housing Targets by Neighbourhoods as shown on Exhibit "A"for Neighbourhood N15— Port Darlington and adjusting the totals accordingly. 2. By amending May H2— Neighbourhood Planning Units Bowmanville Urban Area by revising the population of the Port Darlington Neighbourhood from "2950" to "2650" as shown on Exhibit"B". 3. By amending Map A Land Use, Port Darlington Neighbourhood Secondary Plan as shown on Exhibit"C". 4. By amending Map B Natural Features and Constraints, Port Darlington Neighbourhood Secondary Plan as shown on Exhibit"D". 5. By amending Section 4.2 of the Port Darlington Neighbourhood Secondary Plan by deleting "3200 persons" and replacing it with "2650 persons". 6. By deleting Section 11.3 of the Port Darlington Secondary Plan and replacing it with a new Section 11.3 to read as follows: "11.3 A New Type `C'arterial road parallel to the waterfront shall be designed and constructed to encourage slow traffic speeds with direct frontage and frequent intersections in low density residential areas. On street parking may also be permitted on the south side of the road adjacent to the Waterfront Greenway designation. In recognition of the intent set out above and the fact that the waterfront greenway is not designated as a Type `C'arterial road in the Durham Regional Official Plan, a right-of-way width for this road of less than 26 metres may be permitted:" IMPLEMENTATION: The provisions set forth in the Clarington Official Plan, as amended, regarding the implementation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this Amendment. INTERPRETATION: The provisions set forth in the Clarington Official Plan, as amended, regarding the interpretation of the plan, shall apply in regard to this Amendment. This document is in draft form.The contents,including any opinions,conclusions or recommendations contained in, or which may be implied from, this draft document must not be relied upon. GHD reserves the right, at any time, without notice,to modify or retract any part or all of the draft document. To the maximum extent permitted by law, GHD disclaims any responsibility or liability arising from or in connection with this draft document GHD I Report for Port Darlington Land Corporation—Rationale for Proposed Official Plan Amendment,01081 K 113 8-12 EXHIBIT "A" TO AMENDMENT # Table 9-2 Housing Targets by Neighbourhoods Urban Area- U nits Nei hbourhoods Low IMediuml High Intensification Total Courtice N1 Town Centre 0 0 . 250 100 350 N2 West Shopping District 0 0 0. 350 350 N3 Worden 1175 85 0 100 1360 N4 Highland 1225 100 0 75 1400 N5 Glenview 550 535 0 50 1135 N6 Hancock 850 100 0 25 975 N7 Avondale 825 200 0 275 1300 N8 Emily Stowe ....,._1475 275 0 5.50, 2300 N9 Penfound 1175 150 0 75 1400 N10 Darlington 450 25 175 375 1025 N11 Bayview 1150 300 125 50 ' 1625 N12 Farewell Heights* 0 TOTAL 11 88751 17701 5501 26251 13220 Bowmanvi Ile N1. East Town Centre 0 700 225 275 1200 N2 West Town Centre 0 350 1500 0 1850 N3 Memorial 975 0 250 350 1575 N4 Central 425 125 75 75 700 N5 Vincent Massey 1125 250 0 175 1550 N6 Apple Blossom 1300 225 0 125 1650 N7-_ Elgin ___.. X025 200 50 150 1425 N8 Fenwick 1325 525 0 100 1950 N9 Knox 1350 300 175 125 1950 N10 Northglen 1500 525 100 50 2175 N11 Brookhill 950 550 0 75 1575 N12 Darlington Green 675 375 125 125 1300 N13 Westvale 900 425 500 75 1900 N14 Waverly 1075 275 50 75 1475 N15 Port Darlin ton 25025 1425 91 425 1 2511125 +2215 TOTAL 129001 53251 34751 18001 23500 Newcastle Village N1... Villaae..Centre 0 100 50 75 225 N2 Graham 1075 100 0 100 1275 N3 Foster 1575 300 0 12.5 2000 N4 Port of Newcastle 500 325 250 0 1075 N5 North Village 1050 250 0 50 1350 N6 Wilmot 9601 Of 01 01 960 TOTAL 51601 10751 3001 3501 6885 Potential housing units for Farewell Heights Neighbourhood subject to the provisions of Special Policy Area No.'5 (see Secion 17.6) Municipality of Clarington Official Plan—April 2012 Chapter 9—Page 5 8-13 EXHIBIT "B"-` O�4MENDMENT 10 T NOR G 1 (6500) 1 0 200 400 600 800 m 200 m T CONCESSION ROAD 3 T Tr, 7 NN 9 8 a b r (535 ) F(ENW' 1 Z � o � a T � w m � 11 J z 6� r BROOKHILL � ELGIN (3900) (3900) APP (LE4 BLa SOM I T Q 4 CONCESSION STREET � 2 CENTRAL 5 r KING ST. (2000) u� I 1 r TO CENTRE G E VIN (N4T3'5 ) SEY � DARUNGTCNI (4300) T GREEN I (3200) r 14 (3100) WAVERLY 1 T 13 (4200) I o w ALE 3 (47 0) MEMORIAL w ( OO) BASELINE ROAD r T ytGHwpY 40 t ¢T i 0 15 W�ORT DARLINGTb m r T MAP H2 1 NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING UNITS BOWMANVILLE URBAN AREA OFFICIAL PLAN MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON --- - URBAN BOUNDARY APRIL, 2012. NEIGHBOURHOOD BOUNDARY REFER TO SECTIONS 5 AND 9 THIS CONSOLIDATION IS PROVIDED FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY 0000) POPULATION AND REPRESENTS REQUESTED MODIF1CAMONS AND APPROVALS 8-14 I EXHIBIT "C'" TO AMENDMENT # LOT 11 LOT 10 LOT 9 LOT 8 LOT 7 LOT 6 LOT 5 LJ_,W m I o I a o m ROAD FREEWAY e �iAi�z..y,r•�i,.y t#•y. 1 � � tli PARKETI-E TO Z LOW DENSITY ` _ RESIDENTIAL - - -_ _ DMl O r' y> ----- 6 Ya.�. _ Fr• ti Iv: - I t�imw ADPF t ?2�I�'..-alp 'fi,c•r, �,�.. Vii., f: '<'; — — — 1n .r' /i y _ i 1. ,r LAK ONARf O - - RE-ALIGN ROADS ' ` 0 200 400 600 m 100 m - I SECONDARY PLANNING AREA LOW D ® PRESTIGE p t........... RESIDENTIAL NTIAL PARKETTE EMPLOYMENT AREA �A�� MEDIUM DENSITY UTILITIES DP DISTRICT PARK RESIDENTIAL LAND USE HIGH DENSITY g w ;; ENVIRONMENTAL RESIDENTIAL '' PROTECTION AREA e e e a o e WATERFRONT TRAIL PORT DARLINGTON NEIGHBOURHOOD VILLAGE „=r_.,:;, WATERFRONT SECONDARY PLAN COMMERCIAL ` S-% GREENWAY LOCAL TRAIL MARINA APRIL 2012 COMMERCIAL GREEN SPACE Tests CON50l1oAT ON IS PRONGED FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY AND REPRESEtJTS REQUESTED MODIFICATIONS AND APPROVALS 0 I EXHIBIT "p"p TO AMENDMENT IVT # LOT 11 v' � LOT is LOT 9 LOT a LOT 7 COT 6 LOT 5 I o l .� i '•7� °�° � MACpONA� m k£ RDgp I� OAR7f�R FRfF}yAY j ' rc I ` I x w .t° � J O ° O � Z --- -- 200 loo 400 ROADS soo m RE-ALIGN -- ---- 1a0 SECONDARY PLANNING-AREA I WETLAND MAP B REGULAMRY SHORELINE AREA NATURAL FEATURES •+.s.s•••a,s FLOODLINE AND CONSTRAINTS . FILL LINE PORT DARLINGTON NEIGHSOURH00D `'—---- SECONDARY PLAN AML, 2012 TH15 COR NDA]10N I5 RROVIDED FOR .I AND REPRESENTS REQUESfEp D06�FlCATION5 Aun ONLY -- I Clarhigton REPORT® PLANNING DEPARTMENT SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: N/A Report#: PSD-074-13 File#: COPA 2013-0004 & ZBA 2013-0016 Subject: AN APPLICATION FOR A CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING TO ALLOW CAMPING ON LANDS ADJACENT TO CANADIAN TIRE MOTORSPORT PARK APPLICANT: REPUBLIC LIVE INC. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-074-13 be received; 2. THAT the applications to amend the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law submitted by Republic Live Inc., to allow camping and ancillary uses, continue to be processed and that a subsequent report be prepared; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-074-13 and any delegations be advised of.Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: Da id . Crome, MCIP, RPP WaWi n Wu, Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer ATS/CP/df 29 November 2013 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 8-17 REPORT NO.: PSD-074-13 PAGE 2 1. APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Owner: Darclarke Properties Corp. (Canadian Tire Motorsport Park) 1.2 Applicant: Republic Live Inc. 1.3 Agent: Valerie Cranmer & Associates 1.4 Proposal: Clarington Official Plan Amendment A proposed Clarington Official Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from General Agricultural to Green Space to allow major recreational uses. Zoninq By-law Amendment A proposed zoning by-law amendment to permit outdoor camping, parking and portable washroom facilities associated with events on adjacent Canadian Tire Motorsport Park (CTMP) lands. 1.5 Area: 26.36 hectares (65 acres) 1.6 Location: Part of Lot 1, Concession 8, Former Township of Darlington (Figure 1) 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 This public meeting is required under the Planning Act to consider the new application for a Clarington Official Plan Amendment and the revised rezoning application to allow camping, parking and portable washroom facilities on the subject lands. In addition to submitting the application for an Official Plan Amendment, the applicant has revised the rezoning application previously submitted for a temporary rezoning. The revised application requests a permanent zoning change, and requests that permission to camp not be only for music festivals, but include any event held at Canadian Tire Motorsport Park. 2.2 On June 11, 2013, Republic Live Inc. submitted the original rezoning application to allow unserviced camping as a temporary use on three parcels. The applicant revised their application by withdrawing the portion of their application that applied to lands south of CTMP, on the west side of Mosport Road. The applications only pertained to the lands west of CTMP, owned by Darclarke Properties Corp. (Canadian Tire Motorsport Park). 8-18 IT! N Property Location Map(Darlington) 0 o � Q REGIONALROAD ' V 5 N Z W Q -� Z O Subject 0 Site Q _ REGIONAL ROAD 20 o O d C ° -4 Z A Z � o W P.OAD w S EL I ° REGIONAL ROAD 20 Z 6 CONCESSION ROAD 10 ° 0 (!Z ION ROF 7 � N E I N RO 0 m Q O LLJ Z =L Z o COPA 2013-0004 ~ Clarington Official Plan Amendment w ED p Q Q U M o ZBA 2013-0016 o L11 m Y Zoning By-law Amendment 4 Z� Q CONCESSION ROAD 18 Applicant: Republic Live Inc D IT! w I cfl REPORT NO.: PSD-074-13 PAGE 4 2.3 A public meeting was held on September 9, 2013 regarding the proposed temporary rezoning. Planning staff indicated that in order for the rezoning to continue to be processed, an application to amend the Clarington Official Plan would be required, in addition to the submission of a Planning Justification report, a Natural Heritage Evaluation and a Traffic Management Plan. 2.4 The Boots and Hearts Music Festival was held August 1 to August 4, 2013. Approximately 18,000 people camped at the festival. Camping, which included both the tents and recreation vehicles (RV's), was accommodated as follows: Approximate Number of Owner, . Campsites Darclarke Properties Corp (Parcel 1) 2,500 Canadian Tire Motorsport Park 2,000 2.5 Following the September 9, 2013 Public Meeting, the applicant retained consultants to prepare the requisite studies and submitted an application to amend the Clarington Official Plan on October 30, 2013. 2.6 From discussions with the owners, it is staff's understanding that race events, at this time, have not reached a size where the Darclarke parcel is needed to accommodate overflow camping or parking. The request to broaden the circumstances under which camping could occur would allow the owners some flexibility in the future to use the property for camping or parking for race events or other events held at the park. 3. LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The subject lands, owned by Darclarke Properties Corp., is located immediately west of the existing Canadian Tire Motorsport Park lands, with frontage along Regional Road 20 and Concession Road 10, Clarke. The aerial photograph (see Figure 2 — Page 5) shows the extent of the proposed use of the subject property during the recent Boots and Hearts Music Festival. The main event area on the Mosport site is shown on Figure 3 (Page 5). 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North - Existing Aggregate Extraction operation, agricultural land South - Woodlot East - Canadian Tire Motorsport Park West - Existing licensed (inactive) Aggregate Extraction site, agricultural land 8-20 • � �r+r-r.t•. '��.1.t d � t..t � ,�lt �.f"�.t✓r� �I.`�1 tt� ��%ti.�n� rk�r��y� _ `+ - _ l • REPORT NO.: PSD-074-13 PAGE 6 4. PROVINCIAL POLICY 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) The lands have not been identified as a Prime Agricultural Area and thus they are considered a Rural Area as defined by the PPS. Recreational, tourism and other economic opportunities are promoted in Rural Areas. Development that is compatible with the rural landscape and sustained by rural service levels should be promoted. Development shall be appropriate to the available infrastructure. Locally-important agricultural and resource areas should be designated and protected by directing non- related development to areas where it will not constrain these uses. 4.2 Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) The ORMCP designates the subject lands Countryside Area, and a small portion Natural Linkage Area. Countryside Area policies promote the protection and continuation of agricultural uses. Natural Linkage Area policies promote the creation of open space linkages between natural heritage features identified as Natural Core Areas. Both designations allow low-intensity recreational uses and unserviced parks. Major recreational uses are permitted in Countryside areas, but prohibited in prime agricultural areas and areas designated primarily for agricultural uses. Criteria are established for the establishment or expansion of a major recreational use. 5. OFFICIAL PLANS 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the lands Countryside Area and Natural Linkage Area. Natural Linkage Areas form part of a central corridor system, the purpose of which is to maintain, improve and restore the ecological integrity of the Moraine. Limited new uses including low-intensity recreation and unserviced camping are permitted in Natural Linkage Areas. Uses permitted in Countryside Areas include those mentioned above as well as agricultural-related uses, small scale commercial, industrial, and institutional uses. Major recreational uses are permitted in Countryside areas, but prohibited in prime agricultural areas and areas designated primarily for agricultural uses. 5.2 Clarington Official Plan The Clarington Official Plan designates the lands General Agricultural, Natural Linkage Area and Environmental Protection Area. A significant woodland is identified on the portion of the site designated as Natural Linkage Area. 8-22 REPORT NO.: PSD-074-13 PAGE 7 The Natural Linkage Areas shall be used only for agricultural uses, home-based occupations, home industries, bed and breakfast establishments, farm vacation homes, low-intensity recreational uses, unserviced parks, and uses related to fish, wildlife and forest management, conservation projects, and flood and erosion control projects. Small-scale structures accessory to low-intensity recreational uses may be permitted. No development shall be permitted on lands designated Environmental Protection Areas, except low-intensity recreation and uses related to forest, fish and wildlife management or erosion control and stormwater management. Temporary use by-laws may be passed to permit the use of lands, buildings or structures, on a temporary basis, for a maximum of three (3) years, for any purpose provided that: a) the proposed use is temporary in nature; b) the proposed use is compatible with adjacent existing land uses, there is minimal impact on the Natural Features and Land Characteristics identified on Map C, or satisfactory measures to mitigate any adverse impacts will be applied; c) there will be no adverse impacts on traffic or transportation facilities or services in the area; d) adequate access and parking are provided; e) the use can be removed and the site can be restored to its original condition; f) adequate sewage disposal and water services are available in compliance with provincial and regional standards; and g) it does not jeopardize.the long term implementation of this Plan. Generally, Council will not permit the extension of any temporary use by-law beyond a period of 10 years. 6. ZONING BY-LAW 6.1 Zoning By-law 84-63 zones the subject lands Agricultural (A) which permits agricultural uses and a single detached dwelling. 7. PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS 7.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject property and a public meeting sign was erected along Regional Road 20. 7.2 At the time of the September 9, 2013 public meeting, individuals and organizations with an interest in the application contacted staff, submitted written correspondence, and/or attended the public meeting regarding the application. The following chart illustrates the comments received on the proposal for the Boots & Hearts Music Festival. 8-23 REPORT NO.: PS®-074-13 PAGE 8 Concerns Benefits • Protection of the Oak Ridges Moraine • Economic impacts • Public safety • Recreational/tourism impacts • Public nuisances • Support of Canadian/local artists • Security • Support of local charities • Traffic congestion • Blocked access to neighbouring properties • Road conditions • Speeding • Noise • Trespassing • Littering • Communication between CTMP/Republic Live Inc. and neighbouring property owners • Impact to telecommunication signals 7.3 At the time of writing this report, one submission has been received by a planning consultant retained by area residents. A review of best management practices by other music festivals is included. The submission provides the following: • Planning opinion on conformity to provincial, regional and local land use planning policy and that the applications do not conform to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; • A review of the reports submitted with the applications with suggested modifications; • Recommended conditions to be implemented should the applications be approved, including: • Limiting density of the campground area • Limiting the event to people 19 years of age or older unless accompanied by an adult; • Increase police/security presences • List eviction offences and enforce • Establish emergency management plan • Include a police command centre with camera surveillance • Restrict movement of vehicles once parked on site • Improved washroom/hand-washing facilities and waste collection services • Institute a noise curfew of 1:30 a.m. • Strike a traffic management committee that would include Leslie or Ken Kerrigan • Encourage car pooling; provide shuttles • Establish a buffer area around woodlands — no camping, privies, cars or generators 8-24 REPORT NO.: PSD-074-13 PAGE 9 7.4 Resulting from the latest notification, no additional comments have been received by the public. 8. AGENCY COMMENTS 8.1 Regional Planning Department Regional Planning finds the proposed camping is permitted by the policies of the Regional Official Plan, and has no objection to the proposed applications. However the Region notes that site specific policies may be warranted giving the nature of the proposal. The official plan and/or zoning by-law provisions may include policy and/or regulations relating to setbacks, waste management/water supply, and traffic management. The application is exempt from Regional approval. The Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment finds no evidence of contamination on the site. The Region accepts the findings. The Region requests that the recommendations of the Scoped Natural Heritage Evaluation be followed during any approved camping use. The Region also requests additional information to satisfy the Minimum Distance Separation calculations if there are nearby agricultural operations. 8.2 Regional Health Department A written submission made to the Regional Health Department, at least 4 weeks in advance of any camping activity, will be required for approval. The submission should include details regarding the storage, haulage route and disposal of any portable facilities as well as the source, storage and haulage route of any drinking/potable water. 8.3 Regional Works Department The Traffic Management Plan has been reviewed by the Durham Regional Works. The report is generally acceptable, however, technical comments have been provided to the traffic consultant for consideration in the final report. 8.4 Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority The Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority has reviewed the application and the proposed Natural Heritage Evaluation. The GRCA highlights that the evaluation does not fully report on the intensive impacts of the private campground on the woodland ie. intrusion of patrons, noise, light and litter. The evaluation suggests that camping be permitted up to the limit of the significant woodland, however the GRCA recommends that a buffer (minimum vegetation protection zone) be provided to satisfy provisions of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The GRCA recommends that the buffer be implemented through the Zoning By-law amendment and that the future site plan agreement include requirements to install fencing and signage to protect to the woodland and buffer area. It is recommended that a monitoring plan be prepared to measure effectiveness of the mitigation measures over the course of the events, should the applications be approved. 8-25 REPORT NO.: PSD-074-13 PAGE 10 9. DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS 9.1 Emergency and Fire Services All fire access routes to all camping areas shall have a minimum width of 6.0 metres. 9.2 Engineering Services The Traffic Management Plan submitted in support of the festival and camping is currently under review. The use of Darlington-Clarke Townline Road for access to the campground area will not be permitted. The point where Darlington-Clarke Townline Road is crossed must be along the open portion. A 30 metre x 10 metre sight triangle is required at the intersection of Concession Road 10 and Darlington-Clarke Townline Road. The southerly limit of the open portion of Darlington-Clarke Townline Road must be barricaded to traffic two days before, during and two days after any music festival. The applicant will be responsible for 100% of all costs, financial and otherwise to establish a suitable road barricade. Engineering Services highlights that while there is no re-grading proposed at this time, any future plans for regrading would require the approval of a grading and drainage plan and may warrant a site alteration permit and/or a road damage deposit. 9.3 Building Division The Building Division has no concerns regarding the application. 9.4 Operations The Operations Department has reviewed the Traffic Management Plan and finds that the report addresses current issues, however, costs for recommended improvements are not identified in budget forecasts. 10. DISCUSSION 10.1 Republic Live is requesting permission to allow camping, parking and portable washroom facilities on the subject lands related to events on the adjacent Canadian Tire Motorsport Park lands, a designated Tourism Node. In order to permit these uses, amendments to both the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law are required. 10.2 Canadian Tire Motorsport Park is an established facility with zoning for a motor vehicle race track, agricultural fairground and music festivals. It is identified as a Tourism Node in the Clarington Official Plan, an indication of an area of major tourism and recreation potential. The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan would consider CTMP 8-26 REPORT NO.: PSD-074-13 PAGE 11 a major recreational use and provides polices for the establishment and expansion of such uses. 10.3 The applicant is not requesting an expansion to the Tourism Node, but rather requests that during certain events at CTMP, permission be granted to allow camping, parking and portable washroom facilities on the subject lands. At this time, there are no plans to construct any permanent structures or to expand the principle race track use. 10.4 In considering this proposal, Council and the public need to be aware that the request is for permission to camp for any event held at CTMP. It is noted that the Boots and Hearts Music Festival and associated camping raised issues, including: • Public Safety • Traffic management • Emergency services (Fire, Police, EMS, Security personnel) • Positive and negative community impacts • Impacts on the natural heritage system • Potential agricultural impacts These impacts were discussed following the 2013 Boots and Hearts Music Festival at wrap-up meetings held with representatives from Republic Live Inc., Canadian Tire Motorsport Park, Municipality of Clarington, Durham Regional Police, Durham Region EMS, St. John's Ambulance, Lakeridge Health and security personnel. 10.5 To support the subject applications, and to address the above noted concerns, a Planning Justification report, a Natural Heritage Evaluation and a Traffic Management Plan were submitted and circulated for review and comments. These will be reviewed in detail in a future staff report. 10.6 Generally, the Traffic Management Plan has demonstrated that the surrounding road network can accommodate the traffic generated by the music festival, including camping, and operational improvements have been presented in draft form. Staff's review of the Traffic Management Plan will include prioritization and feasibility of the suggested improvements, followed by implementation of select improvements as a requisite for the 2014 festival and beyond. Cost-sharing will be part of the discussion. 10.7 The Planning consultant for the applicant has recommended that the Green Space designation be applied and that the camping use would be permitted as a recreational use. The land use designation must conform to the policies of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and Durham Regional Official Plan, and will also be reviewed in the context of the Clarington Official Plan review dealing with the Countryside. 10.9 Use of the lands for camping also requires site plan approval and the owners would enter into a site plan agreement to control access, site layout, fencing/signage to protect woodlot, lighting, and waste/recycling. 11. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 8-27 REPORT NO.: PSD-074-13 PAGE 12 12. CONCLUSION 12.1 The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the proposed Clarington Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning applications submitted by Republic Live Inc. Staff will continue processing the applications including the preparation of a subsequent report upon resolution of the identified issues. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Anne Taylor Scott, Planner II Attachments: Attachment 1 - Proposed Official Plan Amendment List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Republic Live Inc. Darclarke Properties Corp. Valerie Cranmer, Valerie Cranmer & Associates Leslie Kerrigan Rob Whitehead Susan Lloyd Swail Rick Rondeau Carolyn Molinari Garry Niece Tricia Hebert Justin Oliver Kevin Anyan Mark & Marilyn Osborn Orlando Corporation 8-28 A T TACHMENT I To RE-PORT PSD-07/1-1 3 PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON OFFICIAL [�I_.A 'l PURPOSE: The purpose of this amendment to the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan is to redesignate the subject lands from General Agricultural to Green Space. The redesignation will allow the proposed development of outdoor camping and associated facilities on the subject lands on a temporary basis. The Natural Linkage and Environmental Protection designation on the lands remain. LOCATION: The subject lands are located in Part Lot 1, Concession 8, Former Township of Darlington, south of Regional Road 20. The lands are located directly west of the lands utilized by the Canadian Tire Motorsport Park. BASIS: This amendment is based on the resolution of the Planning Committee on with respect to Official Plan Amendment Application ACTUAL AMENDMENT: The Official Plan of the Municipality of Clarington is hereby amended as follows: 1) by revising Map Al (Darlington) — Land Use — Darlington Rural Area as shown in the attached schedule IMPLEMENTATION: The policies in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, regarding implementation, shall apply to this Amendment. INTERPRETATION: The policies in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan regarding implementation, shall apply to this Amendment. 21 8-29 SCHEDULE ITO PROPOSED CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT t !A omaa r u,l I p flul wl i r REDESIGNATE SUBJECT LANDS FROM GENERAL AGRICULTURE TO OPEN SPACE 22 tae-mmo f( zzuv& 8-30 Clarington REPORT PLANNING E . VICE DEPARTMENT PUBLIC MEETING Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: PSD-075-13 File#: COPA 2013-0003; ZBA 2013-0029 Subject: APPLICATIONS FOR AN OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING TO PERMIT A DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANT, A RESTAURANT, A BANK WITH A DRIVE-THROUGH AND TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS, ONE WITH GROUND FLOOR RETAIL AND RESTAURANT USES APPLICANT: 668390 ONTARIO LTD. (KAITLIN CORPORATION) RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-075-13 be received; 2. THAT the applications to amend the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law 84-63, submitted by 668390 Ontario Ltd. (Kaitlin Corporation) to permit a drive-through restaurant, a restaurant, a bank with a drive-through and two office buildings, one with ground floor retail and restaurant uses continue to be processed; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-075-13 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. i Submitted by Reviewed by: % David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP -ranklin Wu, Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer RP/CS/av/df "y 3 December 2013 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 3A6 T 905-623-3379 8-31 REPORT NO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 2 1. APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Owner: 668390 Ontario Ltd. 1.2 Applicant/Agent: Kaitlin Corporation 1.3 Proposal: Official Plan Amendment: ® To permit an increase to the maximum allowable retail and service uses on the ground floor area from 200 sq. m. to 758 sq. m; © To permit the use of stand-alone commercial buildings; To permit an increase in the number of financial institutions (bank) in the West Bowmanville Town Centre from 2 to 3; and ® To reduce the minimum total street frontage occupied by buildings on Durham Highway 2. Zoning By-law Amendment: To rezone the subject lands from Agricultural (A) Zone to an appropriate zone to permit the proposed office and commercial development. 1.4 Proposal Description: The proposed development for this site will contain a three storey mixed-use building with the ground floor dedicated to commercial retail and restaurant uses (ground floor area is 758 sq. m.) and the second and third floors to office space, three (3) stand-alone service related commercial buildings, two (2) with drive-throughs and, a two storey office building. 1.5 Area: 1.52 Ha (3.76 acres) 1.6 Location: The site is located on the southwest corner of Durham Highway 2 and Regional Road 57. The subject lands are located in part lot 15, Concession 1, former Township of Darlington. The subject lands are also referred to as 1 Martin Road Bowmanville (Figure 1). 8-32 REPORT NO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 3 Figure 1 - Key Map 1 i ..�..—.�,..�__�Durham Highway 2...�___._,.._.�____ ot 1 k V.- }Gt _ 3 Storey Restaurant( 1 ,T t.,,;''�•�_' '_�.., cu LO m cu F_j 7 Storey/ 1 _.._ — i=-- —i f ` rls Future Prince William Boulevard �f � N 1 I i , 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 On October 9, 2013, Kaitlin Corporation submitted an application on behalf of 668390 Ontario Ltd., for an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit an office commercial development consisting of five (5) buildings and a public open space area. The buildings will be used for office, retail, and service commercial uses. The application was deemed complete on October 25, 2013. 2.2 The applicant submitted the following background studies in support of the application: • Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment prepared by Geo Logic Inc. • Traffic Impact Study prepared by Tranplan Associates Ltd. 8-33 REPORT NO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 4 o Planning Rational Report Prepared by The Biglieri Group Financial Institution Space Analysis prepared by UrbanMetrics Inc. ® Functional Servicing Brief prepared by DG Biddle Associates ® Master Plan prepared by JVF Landscape Consultants 3. LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The property comprises 1.52 Ha (3.76 acres) of vacant land,area. The site slopes down to the east (Figure 2) and north (Figure 3) towards the existing roads, and to the west toward a church. A rise of between two and three metres separates the northern property line from the grade at Durham Highway 2, while the east property line is approximately one to two metres above the grade from Regional Road 57. Figure 2 Rio Figure 3 1 j r a- 8-34 REPORT RIO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 5 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North — Community facility Garnet B. Rickard Recreational Complex across Durham Highway 2 South — Vacant land planned for future extension of Prince William Boulevard and designated for Mid-rise High Density Residential. The future proposed GO station is also located southwest of the subject site East — Vacant land across Regional Road 57 which is designated Office Commercial West — Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 4. PROVINCIAL POLICY 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement 4.1.1 The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides a framework to guide development within municipalities. When building strong communities, the Province supports efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well being of the province and municipality over the long term, particularly in areas where existing infrastructure can be utilized. The proposed development is within a settlement area of the Municipality. Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted. Land use patterns within settlement areas shall support a mix of land uses in a compact form. 4.2 Provincial Growth Plan 4.2.1 The Provincial Growth Plan provides a framework for accommodating growth. A fundamental priority of the plan is to encourage intensification of underutilized urban lands to create vibrant communities where infrastructure exists to accommodate growth. The Provincial Growth Plan promotes the creation of compact, complete communities that are transit supportive and pedestrian-friendly. 4.2.2 The subject property is located within the "Built Boundary". The Growth Plan requires that population and employment growth be directed to the built-up areas of the community to utilize existing municipal services and infrastructure and to optimize underdeveloped land. 5. OFFICIAL PLANS 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP) designates the subject lands as "Regional Centre". Regional Centres shall be planned and developed as the main concentrations of urban activities providing a.fully integrated array of institutional, commercial, major retail, residential, recreational, cultural, entertainment and major office uses. Regional Centres shall support the overall, long-term targets by having a floor space index of 2.5. 8-35 REPORT NO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 6 5.2 Clarington Official Plan 5.2.1 The Clarington Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Town Centre" which permits an array of retail and personal service, office, residential, cultural, community, institutional and recreational uses. Town Centres are to be developed as the main concentration of urban activity in the community; providing a fully integrated array of retail and personal service, office, residential, cultural, recreational and institutional uses. The Town Centre will function as the focal point of culture, art, entertainment and civic gathering, be places of symbolic and physical interest for residents, and foster a sense of local identity. 5.2.2 Secondary Plan The Bowmanville West Town Centre Secondary Plan (BWTCSP) was approved as a more detailed planning document designed to guide land use, community design, and transportation (See Figure 4). Under this Secondary Plan, the site is designated "Office Commercial." Figure 4 Major Tenants within the Bowmanville West Town Centre Area (BWTCSP) Walmart Canadian Tire �� � J• - Home Depot s, fl '•/� _.ST_YENS R1sn - f Cineplex ' bA 1` Subject Site s Loblaws _ w _� IN Target I '� ' - I! .� ' �`` •��e i` Multi-Tenant i Building GG ! � �: � i III � �� ` +', i€' - •! - � • {JS} !f •1,, LA —1 8-36 REPORT NO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 7 5.2.3 The "Office Commercial" area is to provide appropriate office employment opportunities in addition to residential and commercial uses at a highly visible location in the West Town Centre, such as the prominent intersection of Durham Highway 2 and Regional Road 57. The permitted uses for this designation include: • Office uses including: corporate; business; professional; administrative; and government offices. • Hotel and convention facilities. • Institution and community uses including social, recreational, educational and cultural facilities; day care and nursery facilities. • Retail and service uses provided they are accessory to the primary office use, are located on the ground floor of such building and the gross leasable floor area does not exceed 20% of the ground floor area of such building or 200 sq. m, whichever is the lesser of the two. • Residential dwelling units up to a maximum of 150 units per hectare on the development site. 5.2.4 In addition the BWTCSP permits a maximum of 2 full service banks or financial institutions. 5.2.5 A public street (Street F) is designated along the west side of the site extending between Highway 2 and Prince William Boulevard. 5.2.6 Urban design policies contained in the Clarington Official Plan and the BWTCSP apply to the proposal: Town Centres • Have buildings sited near the street line to contribute to a sense of enclosure and strong edge; • Locate main building entrances that are visible and directly accessible from the public sidewalk of the main street; • Enhance the built environment with attention to massing, building articulation, architectural detail, the use of local materials and styles; and • Enhance the pedestrian environment with awnings, pedestrian scale lighting, landscaping, benches and other street amenities. Prominent Intersections • Provide building massing and height sufficient to emphasize the significance of the intersection; • Provide high quality building materials and building articulation on both street frontages; • Provide the main public entrance located at the corner; and • Provide landscaping, street furniture and public art elements. Urban Design Objectives and Standards • Achieves urban design objectives regarding sense of place, street connectivity, pedestrian access, urban street edge, plan for infill and sustainability; 8-37 REPORT NO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 8 • Provides appropriate sidewalks widths which continue to the building face and promote active and safe pedestrian activity; • Reduce building setbacks to allow for building entrances to be closer to public street sidewalks; • Provide appropriate setback from the property line on Highway 2; • To define the street edge and the prominence of the intersection, at least 50% of the total street frontage shall be occupied by buildings on King Street/Highway 2. • Provide articulated building facades to create a consistent rhythm across the fagade; • Design corner buildings which include articulated building elements that enhance the visibility of this location and emphasize the focal nature of the building; • Minimize the visual impact of surface parking and service areas by screen walls, landscaping or lowering of the parking areas; and • Locate amenities in close proximity to building entrances. 6. ZONING BY-LAW 6.1 Zoning By-law 84-63 zones the subject lands Agricultural (A) Zone. The applicant has applied to amend the Zoning By-law to General Commercial (Cl) Zone to allow the proposal. 7. PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS 7.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject site and to the Historic Downtown Bowmanville Business Area (Bowmanville Improvement Area). 7.2 Two public meeting notice signs were installed on the property. The public notice was also posted on the Municipality's website and in the Planning Services electronic newsletter. 7.3 The Historic Downtown Bowmanville Business Area (Bowmanville Improvement Area) has not provided any specific comments but as Council is aware, they recently requested that Council place a moratorium on further retail development in the Bowmanville area until the local economy has stabilized. 8. AGENCY COMMENTS 8.1 The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority has no objection to the proposal. They have advised that a stormwater management report along with site grading, drainage and servicing plans, as well as sediment and erosion control plans will be required through the site plan process. 8.2 At the time of the writing of this report, Staff have not yet received comments from the Region of Durham Planning Department. 8-38 REPORT NO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 9 9. DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS 9.1 Engineering Services has no objection, in principle to the proposal. Prior to final approval of the subject site plan the applicant will be required to satisfy the Engineering Services Department regarding the following concerns and conditions: • Traffic A Traffic Impact Study has been submitted in support'of this application. The Traffic Impact Study is currently being reviewed and will be subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services and the Region of Durham. The Traffic Impact Study must address the impact of the adjacent development on the road network and intersections. The study must assess the need for Street 'F' as shown in the Secondary Plan. It must make recommendations with respect to entrances to the site and their location with respect to ingress and egress to and from lands on the south side of Prince William Boulevard. The study must also make recommendations with respect to road improvements required to facilitate this development. Any road network or intersection improvements deemed necessary by the Director of Engineering Services or the Region to facilitate the development will be at 100% cost to the developer. • Prince William Boulevard Extension The applicant will be responsible for 100% cost of construction of Prince William Boulevard from its existing east terminus to Regional Road 57, to a full urban ,standard. If this development is phased, the road must be constructed in its entirety during the initial phase of the development. The Municipality will cost share for oversizing of the road. Further discussion of this matter between the Municipality and the applicant is required. • Grading A preliminary grading plan has been submitted which is currently under review. The grading plan must be compatible with adjacent lands, perimeter road grades, future road grades and must meet the intent of the West Side Creek Master Drainage Study. There is a significant grade at the north end of the site down to the Regional Road 57 road allowance. The treatment of this grade with the development of the commercial buildings will be subject to further discussion among the Engineering Services Department, Planning Services Department and the applicant prior to the approval of the future site plan application. • Servicing Water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer services will be provided to this site from the Prince William Boulevard extension. A Functional Servicing Report has been submitted which is acceptable in principle. Full engineering review of the servicing will occur at the detailed design stage of the construction of Prince William Boulevard in conjunction with the site plan application for the subject site. 8-39 REPORT NO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 10 • Stormwater Management The Functional Servicing Report confirms that the subject site is included in and does conform to the Westside Creek Master Drainage Study in terms of stormwater quantity and quality and that the runoff will be controlled by the existing infrastructure. • Sidewalks A pedestrian sidewalk connection must be provided from the Regional Highway 2/Regional Road 57 intersection to the site at 100% cost to the applicant and to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services and the Region of Durham. The applicant will also be required to provide pedestrian connectivity to the future residential lands to the west. 10. DISCUSSION 10.1 The applicant is proposing to delete a segment of the grid street system (Street F). Further review will be required of this proposal in relation to the long term needs for development and intensification. 10.2 The approach to commercial planning in Clarington was developed through the Commercial Policy Review (Report#:PSD-027-06). The preferred approach for the West Town Centre included the phasing of commercial space to avoid an adverse impact on the downtown and the East Town Centre which resulted in the retail threshold policies. The BWTCSP states; "It is intended that retail development in the West Town Centre be phased in so as to ensure that retail growth in this area complements existing businesses and potential commercial development in the East Town Centre". The intent was not to regulate competition but to ensure that the planned function of the downtowns, and the Town and Village Centres are maintained while continuing to provide accessibility and convenience for the public. 10.3 The BWTCSP outlines the retail threshold policies of the Plan. This section states that retail and service development shall proceed in a fashion that sufficiently supports the existing population to ensure that retail development and the growth in population for Clarington are balanced. The development of retail and service floor space in the BWTCSP will proceed in an incremental fashion. Until such time as the Clarington population reaches 91,000 persons, the maximum permitted retail and service floor space in the West Town Centre is as follows: retail floor space 73,000 sq. m; service floor space 7,000 sq. m. This will be further reviewed through the application process. The estimated population in Clarington as of May 2013 was 90,000. 10.4 The BWTCSP only permits a maximum of two (2) full service banks or financial institutions. The applicant has applied for an amendment to allow the development of an additional bank. Traditionally banks have served as anchors to Bowmanville's historic downtown. The Official Plan policies were restricted to two banks in the West Town Centre, to retain the bank branches in Downtown Bowmanville. The Financial Institution Space Analysis Study prepared by Urban Metrics Inc. indicates that with the 8-40 REPORT NO.: PSD-075-13 PAGE 11 overall demand for financial institution space and the growing population, the market could support a bank on the site. Their analysis indicates that the two remaining banks in the downtown would not be impacted. Existing banks in Bowmanville, including those in the downtown, would be able to support additional branches in the community. This will be reviewed further through the application process. 11. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 12. CONCLUSION 12.1 The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the proposal submitted by 668309 Ontario Ltd (Kaitlin Corporation) for the Public Meeting under the Planning Act. Staff will continue processing the application including the preparation of a subsequent report upon resolution of the identified issues. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: X Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Ruth Porras, Senior Planner/Urban Designer List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: 668390 Ontario Ltd. Kaitlin Corporation Anne Messore, SmartCentres Jenny Lee, SmartCentres Bowmanville BIA, c/o Edgar Lucas Bowmanville BIA, c/o Garth Gilpin 8-41 Clad ngton REPORT ENGINEERING VI E DEPARTMENT PUBLIC MEETING Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: EGD-040-13 File#: Subject: PROPOSAL TO CLOSE AND CONVEY TWO ADJOINING RIGHT-OF-WAYS SITUATED IN LOT 17 CONCESSION 5, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON (HAMPTON) RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD-040-13 be received; 2. THAT the applicant pay all advertising, legal, appraisal and $31,421 in land costs associated with this transaction; 3. THAT Council pass the by-law attached to Report EGD-040-13 to close and convey two adjoining unopen right-of-ways being two lanes created by Plan H50066 and Plan H50067 situated in Lot 17, Concession 5, former Darlington Township (Hampton) to 562503 Ontario Limited; and 4. THAT 562503 Ontario Limited and Honey Harbour Estates Ltd. and any interested party be notified of Council's decision. i Submitted by: !' �'. ,L - Reviewed b : --Y Y A.S. Cannella, C.E.T. Franklin Wu, Director, Engineering Chief Administrative Officer Services ASC/LJB/bc/jb CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 9-1 ®L®V F_% IYV.. LG1°0-Ae0°13 19/�L7G L 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 In June 2013, Council passed a resolution to implement the recommendations of Report EGD-023-13; specifically: to approve in principle the closure and conveyance of two adjoining unopen right-of-ways being two lanes created by Plan H50066 and H50067 situated in Lot 17, former Township of Darlington (north side of Ormiston Street, Hampton-see Attachment 1). 1.2 The proposed closure and conveyance was requested by the Municipality to facilitate the development of lands on the north side of Ormiston Street which are the subject of eight land division applications. 1.3 Since Council approved the road closure and conveyance in principle, all departments, utilities, agencies and provincial and federal authorities have been circulated with the notice to close the road allowance (as per municipal policy). No objections were received. The Municipality undertook an appraisal of the road allowance (at the applicant's expense), and the two parcels were appraised at a value of$31,421 by the Municipal appraiser. The applicant is agreeable to this price and will be making payment to the Municipality prior to passing the appropriate by-law (attachment#2). The appraisal report is on file in the Engineering Services Department road closure files. 1.4 In accordance with municipal policy, a public meeting has been scheduled for December 9, 2013 to give the public an opportunity to speak for or against the road closure. 1.5 In accordance with the recommendations of Report EGD-023-13, staff recommend that the two unopen road allowances be closed and conveyed to the applicant for the appraised value of$31,421 plus all other applicable costs. 2. CONCURRENCE - Not Applicable 3. CONCLUSION 3.1 It is recommended that, subject to any input received at the public meeting, Council authorize the closure of the subject unopen lanes and their conveyance to 562503 Ontario Ltd. For the appraised value plus applicable costs as deemed by the Director of Engineering Services. 9-2 R_rUM T IVO.: CGL�J-V 4V-13 �'H191= 3 CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Leslie J. Benson, P. Eng. Manager, Development Engineering and Traffic Attachments: Attachment 1 - Key Map Attachment 2 - Draft By-law List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: 562503 Ontario Ltd. Honey Harbour Estates 513 Westney Road South, Unit 4 Ajax, Ontario L1 S 6W8 And any individuals who appear at the Public Meeting. i 9-3 Right-of-Wa I to be Closed and Conveyed (5m x 150m) r 7 0 O 7 o� a. �0 r� Right-of-Way to be U) y Closed and Conveyed o ° PvEN�E (9.1 m x 523m) EoMoNsON y2 Applicant's 7� Lands a 5� off` �s HAMPTON � o o King Ln. ��d S sC, i 4`01 DRAWN BY: E.L. DATE: Nov.29, 2013 Taunton Rd. REPORT EGD-040-13 KEY MAP ATTACHMENT NO. 1 GAAttachments\Ormiston Closure.mxd Attachment 2 To Report EGD-040-13 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO. 2013-XXX Being a by-law to stop up and close and to authorize the conveyance of a road allowance. WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington has approved the recommendations of Report EGD-040-13, and deems it desirable to pass this by-law; and NOW THEREFORE be it enacted and it is hereby enacted as a by-law of the .Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as follows: 1. That the property described as part of the unopened road allowances created by Plan H50066 and Plan. H50067, being Part of Lot 17, Concession 5, now Parts 1, 3, 4 and 5 on Plan 40R-XXXXX, (in the former Township of Darlington), now in the Municipality of Clarington, is hereby stopped up and closed; and 2. That the Municipal Solicitor be authorized to take all action necessary to effect the transfer. BY-LAW passed this day of December, 2013. Adrian Foster, Mayor 9-5 1 Clarington REPORT EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: ESD-007-13 File#: Subject: THIRD QUARTER ACTIVITY REPORT- 2013 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report ESD-007-13 be received for information. Submitted by: Reviewed by: 6f Gord Weir, Franklin Wu, Director of Emergency Chief Administrative Officer Services GW/mb CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 3A6 T 905-623-3379 11-1 j i REPORT NO.: ESD-007-13 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND Report ESD-007-13 covers the period of July 1 to September 30, 2013 and is intended to provide Council with relevant, timely information on the activity of the Emergency and Fire Services Department Suppression Division. 2. COMMENTS The Department responded to 817 calls during this report period. Included in this number were 6 fires with a low risk or greater. Fire damages totaled more than $660,900. Attachment # 1 provides a summary of: • fulltime suppression staffing summary— report period • call volume by station — report period • call volume — quarterly over 3 years • response type summary— report period • fire response details — report period 3. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Mark Berney, Deputy Fire Chief Attachments: Attachment#1 — Emergency Services Suppression Division Activity Report List of Interested Parties: None 11-2 Attachment# 1 to Report ESD-007-13 EMERGENCY SERVICES SUPPRESSION DIVISION ACTIVITY REPORT REPORT PERIOD: JULY 1,2013 00:00:00hrs - SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 23:59:59hrs FULLTIME SUPRESSION STAFFING SUMMARY- REPORT PERIOD THE PERCENTAGE OF TIME PUMPER TRUCKS WERE STAFFED.WITH 980 4 OR MORE FULLTIME FIREFIGHTERS CALL VOLUME BY STATION - REPORT PERIOD Station 1 44 Bowmanville Station 2 Newcastle `' $ ,� Station 3 57 Orono Station 4 a L 206 Courtice -r Station 5 26 Enniskillen 0 100 200 300 400 500 CALL VOLUME - QUARTERLY OVER 3 YEARS 1000 ----- 900 889 881 364 — -- - -- 057 357 354 220 817 800 786-' — ---- - - ------- z 700 --- -- — 600 500 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 ❑2013- 2460 calls 2012- 3396 calls 2011 - 3474 calls 11-3 Attachment# 1 to Report ESD-007-13 RESPONSE TYPE SUMMARY- REPORT PERIOD 23 5 ° 97 3a/0 ' ° 47 12% - � 6% 34 4% 27 � > 3% 13 76 2% 9% 61 7% 434 53% o#1 FIRES n#2 OUTDOOR, NO LOSS FIRES #3 BURNING(controlled) 11#4 CO FALSE CALL n#5 FALSE FIRE CALLS #6 MEDICAL CALLS #7 OTHER CALLS #8 PRE-FIRE CONDITION CALLS #9 PUBLIC HAZARD CALLS #10 RESCUE CALLS FIRE RESPONSE DETAILS - REPORT PERIOD DATE Fire Risk Firefighters On-scene Stand-by Call-Back on 1st Truck Firefighters Firefighters Initiated Jul-10 Moderate 4 15 21 No Jul-13 Low 4 7 23 No Jul-18 Moderate 5 15 24 No Jul-21 Moderate 5 6 13 No Jul-26 Low 4 8 12 No Aug-26 Moderate 5 14 17 No 11-4 Clarington REPORT MUNICIPAL CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: CLD-026-13 File#: Subject: CLARINGTON VOLUNTEER CELEBRATION PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD-026-13 be received; and 2. THAT Staff be directed to implement Option , as outlined in Report CLD-026-13, to recognize Clarington's volunteers. �f Submitted by: i Reviewed by: P tti 'e, CMO /VK.Franklin u, Municipal Clerk r Chief Administrative Officer PLB/CAG CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 13-1 REPORT NO.: CLD-026-13 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 According to our records, Council has celebrated the many volunteers who contribute to the quality of life in our community since at least 1986, with the first "Volunteer Service Recognition Event" having been held on April 23, 1993. Our most recent Volunteer Service Recognition Event was held on May 16, 2012. 1.2 Over the years, the format of the celebration event has evolved. However, the concept of recognition through awards for volunteering has remained relatively constant. Traditionally, the event has been held once per term of Council. Attachment 1 to this Report details the evolution of volunteer recognition within Clarington. 1.3 In 2012, staff contacted approximately 180 volunteer organizations serving Clarington, seeking nominations. With 23 organizations responding (13% response rate), Clarington recognized a total of 114 award recipient volunteers. An estimated 190 people attended the event including recipients and their guests, organization representatives, Members of Council and staff. The event was held at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex in the evening. To assist in creating a warm, welcoming and celebratory atmosphere, an area of the hall was setup to provide for mix and mingling prior to the awards ceremony. Student volunteers from Clarington Central's Coyote Cafe (culinary school) orchestrated the hors d'oeuvres table and service for the food and refreshments. The Swingtime Quartet performed and the Visual Arts Centre displayed a number of works by local artists. Following the reception, the more formal portion of the evening began with Mayor Foster welcoming the guests, followed by guest speaker Derrick McKay, speaking on "Being a Volunteer". Plaque awards were then presented to the recipients by Members of Council. Feedback from Members of Council and event participants was very positive. 1.4 On June 4, 2012, Council adopted the following resolution #GPA-347-12 regarding a yearly volunteer recognition awards event: THAT Staff be directed to prepare a report on the feasibility of holding the Volunteer Recognition Award Ceremony annually; and THAT the report consider the recognition categories be in five year increments. 1.5 In response to the above resolution, staff representatives from the Municipal Clerk's Department, Community Services Department, and Corporate Services Communications and Tourism Division have undertaken a review of Clarington's Volunteer Recognition Policy, considered feedback from our 2012 volunteer event, and researched'what other municipalities do to recognize and celebrate the efforts of their community volunteers. Additionally, staff reached out to 13-2 REPORT NO.: CLD-026-13 PAGE 3 contacts from all of Clarington's volunteer organizations on file for their feedback by way of a survey. 2. VOLUNTEER PROGRAM - CLARINGTON 2.1 According to Report CS-16-93 the purpose of the recognition program was two- fold. First, it was to establish a process whereby the Council of the Municipality could recognize the efforts and commitment of the volunteer community. Second, once the process was established, the Municipality would have a mechanism that would enable Council to submit nominations for inclusion in the appropriate Provincial recognition programs. 2.2 Over time, Clarington's program of volunteer recognition has evolved from a process whereby award recipients were determined through a subjective, committee decision to a process whereby award recipients were determined through a more objective process based on established years of service criteria. Currently, our program awards for years of continued service, to a given volunteer organization, in the following categories. 5 years service but less than 10 10 years service but less than 15 15 years service but less than 20 20 years service but less than 50 More than 50 years service 2.3 Since 2005 the Volunteer Recognition budget was $5000 per event, with this amount increasing to $10,000 in 2012. The additional funds were used to cover cost increases in awards, catering and the overall growth of the event. 3. VOLUNTEER PROGRAM — OTHER MUNICIPALITIES 3.1 In preparing this report, staff contacted several municipalities of similar size or geographic proximity to understand what they do to acknowledge the valued efforts of their community volunteers. While each municipality we contacted recognizes their community volunteers, research findings indicate there is no real standard. Generally speaking, each municipality annually acknowledges their volunteers at an event or meeting of Council. See Attachment 2 for a summary chart of what other municipalities do. 4. REVIEW FINDINGS 4.1 An on-line survey and cover letter was sent to volunteer organizations in or serving Clarington for whom we have an email address, (122 of the 206 organizations on file) seeking their input on how Clarington could best recognize the services and successes of our community volunteers. We received a 24% response rate to the survey which amounts to approximately 29 organizations. 13-3 REPORT NO.: CLD-026-13 PAGE 4 Approximately 40% of the respondents (12 respondents) indicated they were not aware of Clarington's volunteer event. 4.2 The survey questions related to the various elements of our current volunteer program model and were intended to seek input to assist us in evaluating our current program — its value and effectiveness. 4.3 The following is a summary of our research and survey key findings: a) There appears to be very little interest from the volunteer groups in Municipal volunteer recognition (24%.response to survey and 13% event participation). b) Eligibility and nominations are based on duration of service. Currently, not all organizations keep track of their volunteers' service history. "Years of service recognition" does not appear to be well received with only four survey respondents indicating that it should be continued. Alternatives suggested include: • Value of their contribution and its impact on the community • Service of going above and beyond • Creativity of the contribution • Significance of the contribution • Enthusiasm and passion for the service • Diversity of the volunteering service c) Organizations generally felt the limit of five members to be acknowledged was appropriate but larger organizations suggest this is very difficult to do. d) Recognition of volunteers is appreciated, but many view the "awards ceremony" as a political event rather than a celebration of volunteer contributions. e) Volunteers volunteer for the personal, satisfaction, not for an award. f) The Volunteer Wall of Fame (the wooden plaque displaying names of award recipients) is becoming too difficult to manage in its current state. g) The current Recognition Program is only meeting one of the two purposes for which it was initially intended to meet; being a mechanism to recognize efforts and commitment of volunteers. Council nominations to other programs (ie. Provincial) are done outside of this program, by way of Council resolution. h) Many organizations recognize their volunteers through their own celebration event. i) The predominantly preferred means by which volunteers should be recognized is public notification (news letter/blog/social media). j) Survey respondents were rather indifferent on the frequency of the celebration event. 4.4 Undertaking this thorough review presented the opportunity to step back and refine our goals and objectives, analyze our options and either refine or re-define the program model to best meet our goals. It was concluded that our goal is to 13-4 REPORT NO.: CLD-026-13 PAGE 5 promote volunteerism in Clarington and our objectives are to acknowledge, thank and celebrate our community volunteers. The means by which we meet these must be meaningful, timely, sincere and inclusive. Unfortunately our current Volunteer Recognition Program model falls short and does not allow us to meet these objectives. In particular, recognition once every four years is not timely; despite continued efforts by staff to encourage participation, the program is not inclusive; and feedback suggests that an awards ceremony may not be meaningful. 5. PROGRAM OPTIONS 5.1 Option 1 — Status Quo — Event Once per Term of Council —Awards Based on Years of Volunteer Service 5.1.1 Continue with the current Volunteer Recognition Program model. This would include a Recognition event, held once every four years in the second year of the Term of Council. Recognition would include up to five volunteers per organization for their years of service. The first Volunteer Celebration would be scheduled during Volunteer Week 2014. 5.1.2 The cost to continue with our current program would be'approximately $10,000 every four years. 5.1.3 Staff resources required to plan, organize and undertake a similar event to that held in 2012 could be accommodated by the existing staff in the Municipal Clerk's Department. 5.1.4 As stated earlier in this report, the participation rates have remained rather static over the years and therefore should Council opt for this option there should be no expectation that the program would grow in popularity or interest. 5.2 Option 2 —Annual Celebration — No Awards 5.2.1 Replace the current Volunteer Recognition Program model with an annual volunteer "celebration"with no awards ceremony. The concept of this option would be as follows: • The maximum number of volunteers per organization would be on a sliding scale where larger organizations would be permitted to invite more than the smaller organizations. • Guests would be welcomed by words of thanks by the Mayor or designate, followed by a guest speaker. • Those volunteers being celebrated would be published in a Volunteer Yearbook which would be provided to each guest. • The Celebration event would be planned and organized by staff. 13-5 REPORT NO.: CLD-026-13 PAGE 6 • Invitations would be sent to all known organizations serving Clarington. Each organization would determine who of their volunteers they wish to celebrate. Volunteers would be instructed to contact Municipal staff so that the volunteer may be included in the annual Volunteer Yearbook. • The Annual Yearbook would be published on the Clarington website and in the local newspapers. 5.2.2 The annual budget for this event is estimated at $10,000. 5.2.3 Staff resources required to plan, organize, and undertake an event similar to that described above, could not be accommodated by the existing staff in the Municipal Clerk's Department. The Council Services Division staff of the Municipal Clerk's Department is dedicated to performing tasks and duties related to Council and Committee activities (involving weekly deadlines and cycles which cannot be altered) in addition to offering the many services to the public. As well, approximately two years of the four year term of Council requires a significant amount of staff time to plan for and conduct the Municipal Elections and assist Council Members in their new roles. 5.2.4 Although the recognition awards are appreciated, many respondents to the survey indicated that they personally get more reward from their volunteering efforts. Notwithstanding this common response, a celebration event rather than a recognition event has never been implemented and therefore it is difficult to estimate the response and participation rates for this type of event. 5.3 Option 3 —Annual Awards Event—Awards Based on Service Categories 5.3.1 Replace the current Volunteer Recognition Program model with an annual volunteer recognition event where awards are presented based on various service categories rather than just years of service. 5.3.2 This type of event would be based on the model similar to that used for the Clarington Sports Hall of Fame Annual Event. Although the terms of reference for an Annual Volunteer Recognition Awards event has not been established, conceptually, the model would involve: • An annual invitation to our volunteer organizations detailing our nomination categories and encouraging them to submit nominations for the awards. Additionally, the opportunity to nominate would be posted on the Municipal website and in the local newspapers. • A Nomination Review Committee, comprised of members of the volunteer community appointed by staff, would be responsible for reviewing the award nominations and determining the award recipients. • Awards would be presented at an annual Volunteer Awards Dinner. 5.3.3 The annual budget for this event is estimated at $30,000. 13-6 REPORT NO.: CLD-026-13 PAGE 7 5.3.4 As noted in Section 5.2.3, staff resources required to plan, organize, and undertake an event similar to that described above, could not be accommodated by the existing staff in the Municipal Clerk's Department. 5.3.5 The Clarington Sports Hall of Fame has grown to be a very successful endeavour for Clarington. This success has not come without significant effort and resources. Its success is a testimony to the nomination and award process model. Staff believes that this same model could be applied to the recognition of our volunteer community, and believes that it too could prove to be very successful, but would require the same staffing and financial resources to develop and grow the event. The Municipal Clerk's Department has neither the resources nor the staff expertise in this area. 5.4 Option 4 -Annual Volunteer Awards Based on Service Categories — Presented at Council 5.4.1 Replace the current Volunteer Recognition Program model where volunteer awards are presented at a Council meeting, based on various service categories rather than just years of service. 5.4.2 This type of event would be based on the model similar to that used for the Clarington Awards of Academic Excellence. Although the terms of reference for this model of the Annual Volunteer Recognition Awards has not been established, conceptually, the model would involve: • An annual invitation to our volunteer organizations detailing our nomination categories and encouraging them to submit nominations for the awards. Additionally, the opportunity to nominate would be posted on the municipal website and in the local newspapers. • A Special Committee of Council or a Nomination Review Committee, comprised of Members of the volunteer community, would responsible for reviewing the award nominations and determining the award recipients. • Awards would be presented annually at a Council Meeting. 5.4.3 The annual budget for this event is estimated at $5,000. 5.4.4 Staff resources required to plan, organize, and undertake an event similar to that described above, could be accommodated by the existing staff in the Municipal Clerk's Department, working in conjunction with another work unit. 5.4.5 Not to diminish the many hours, years, and sometimes decades of service of our community volunteers, recognition based on volunteer a variety service categories may be a more appropriate means by which to recognize their efforts. An annual awards ceremony would ensure that we are acknowledging these efforts in a timely and inclusive manner. As stated above, the resources simply are not in place to plan, organize and undertake an annual event such as the current Volunteer Recognition Awards celebration or the Sports Hall of Fame 13-7 REPORT NO.: CLD-026-13 PAGE 8 event. Presentation of awards at a meeting of Council would assist in meeting the goals of the program while meeting the current resource constraints. 5.5 Option 5 —Annual Media Campaign Only— No Event or Awards 5.5.1 Replace the current Volunteer Recognition Program model with an annual celebration of volunteers media campaign. The concept of this option would be as follows: • Clarington would not hold any Recognition Event. • A communication would be sent to all known organizations serving Clarington. Each organization would submit the name of their volunteer they wish to celebrate that year in each of the categories listed in Section 4.3(b) of this report and include a photograph of the volunteer. • Volunteers would be instructed to contact the organizing committee so that the volunteer may be included in the annual Volunteer Yearbook. • The Annual Yearbook would be published on the Clarington website and in the local newspapers. • Organizations would also be offered the opportunity for the Mayor or a Member of Council to attend one of their functions where they are celebrating their volunteers. 5.5.2 The annual budget for a celebration of volunteers media campaign is estimated at $7,500 — including print and digital media. 5.5.3 To coordinate and publish the media campaign would rely very heavily on the efforts of the Municipal Clerk's Department and the Communications and Tourism Division. A recognition publication and media campaign has not previously been implemented and therefore it is difficult to estimate the impact on staff resources and to predict the response and participation rates. 6. CONCURRENCE This report has been reviewed by Marie Marano, Director of Corporate Services and Joe Caruana, Director of Community Services. 7. CONCLUSION Our community volunteers are integral to achieving Clarington's vision for a sustainable, creative and caring community. Acknowledging, thanking and celebrating our volunteers is also an integral element in achieving this vision, but to do so must be timely, sincere and inclusive. While feedback from those who attended our previous events has been positive, overall event participation and survey response rates indicate indifference in our current Volunteer Recognition Program and therefore consideration should be given to how best to recognize our valued volunteers, and the necessary resources to do so. 13-8 I REPORT NO.: CLD-026-13 PAGE 9 CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability X Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure X Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Anne Greentree, Deputy Clerk Attachments: Attachment 1 — Evolution of Volunteer Recognition in our Community Attachment 2 — Summary of Other Municipalities Attachment 3 — Survey Response Summary List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: None 13-9 Attachment 1 to Report CLD-026-13 Evolution of Volunteer Recognition in our Community 1986/87 Volunteer Recognition Program Established Selection Committee consisting of: 3 categories of recognition ® 3 members of Council • Outstanding Achievement ® Recreation Superintendent Y Achievement, and ® Deputy Clerk • Service Awards • Mayor (ex-officio) In each category there was a gold medallion, bronze medallion or wooden plaque. 1993 Volunteer Service Recognition Pro ram Established Selection Committee consisting of: Recognition awarded by Service, as i 3 members of Council follows: ® Recreation Superintendent ® Deputy Clerk 5 years — received certificate ® Mayor (ex-officio) 10 years — received certificate 15 years — received certificate and plaque 20 years + - received certificate and plaque and name included on Volunteer Wall of Fame Established eligibility criteria for recipients. 1998 Volunteer Service Reco nition Pro ram Established Selection Committee consisting of: Recognition awarded by Service, as • 3 members of Council follows: • Recreation Superintendent Deputy Clerk 5 years — received certificate • Mayor (ex-officio) 10 years — received certificate 15 years — received certificate and plaque 20 years + - received certificate and plaque and name included on Volunteer Wall of Fame Established the Volunteer Wall of Fame, and that the frequency of ceremonies would be held in second year of each term of Council during National Volunteer Week, and revised eligibility criteria for recipients. 13-10 Attachment 1 to Report CLD-026-13 Evolution of Volunteer Recognition in our Community 2005 Volunteer Service.Recognition Program Established Applications received and evaluated by Recognition awarded by Service, as staff based on the criteria that was follows: established by Council. 5 years 10 years 15 years 20 years 50 years Each recipient received a certificate and a memento and all names were added to the Volunteer Wall of Fame 2008 Volunteer Service Recognition Program Established Applications received and evaluated by Recognition awarded by Service, as staff based on the criteria that was follows: established by Council. 5 years 10 years 15 years 20 years 50 years Each recipient received a certificate plaque and their names were added to the Volunteer Wall of Fame 2012 Volunteer Service Recognition Pro ram Established Applications received and evaluated by Recognition awarded by Service, as staff based on the criteria that was follows: established by Council. 5 years 10 years 15 years 20 years 50 years Each recipient received a certificate plaque and their names were added to the Volunteer Wall of Fame Event outgrew Beech Centre and was held at Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex 13-11 Attachment 2 to Report CLD-026-13 Summary of Other Municipalities City of Oshawa Recipient Eligibility criteria established by Council. Determination Community based organizations nominate up to 2 qualifying members. -Recipients are tracked and may only be recognized once. Event Description Recipients receive an unframed Certificate of Recognition. Certificates are presented at a Meeting of Council. Annual Event near National Volunteer Week Port Hope Recipient Public nominations for 9 awards. 2 categories require nomination Determination form to be signed by a minimum of 10 or 15 people. Administered, tracked and selected by the Civic Awards Advisory Committee (consisting of 1 member of Council and 6 appointed residents Event Description Recipients receive a framed Certificate of Recognition. Youth and Citizen of the year receive statue. Annual "Civic Awards Night" each April with light refreshments City of Peterborough Recipient Nominations for 13 categories, including resume and 2 letters of Determination support. Awards Screening Committee consists of representatives from Parks & Recreat7ion Advisory Committee and Arts & Culture Advisory Committee. (consisting of council representatives and appointed members of the public) Recipients are traced by the Recreation Division. Event Description Recipients receive an unframed certificate. Winners of major awards also have their name engraved on a trophy which they keep for a year. Photo is sent to each winner after the event Annual "Civic Awards Ceremonies" (which is a special meeting of Council) held at the same time/venue as Fleming College graduation ceremony with light refreshments. Town of Cobour Recipient Nominations for.10 categories._ Judges for major categories.- 10 Determination people are nominated for the "Mayor's Award of Distinction" category. Selection Committee appointed by the Mayor Awards are sponsored Event Description Winner receives a Hozelton aluminum sculpture/plaque. Others receive a certificate and pin Annual "Civic Awards", held in February, televised by Cogeco, accompanied by Cobourg Concert Band 13-12 Attachment 2 to Report CLD-926-13 Summary of Other Municipalities City of Kingston Recipient Nominations for "Distinguished Citizen", "Honourable Determination Achievement", "Mayor's Award for Youth Volunteerism". Event Description Winners receive either granite or glass sculpture/award. Winners are announced the week before the ceremony. Annual awards ceremony (with light refreshments), as part of the City's civic reception, held on the steps of Town Hall, on Canada Day. Recipients join in Canada Day parade. Town of Whitby Recipient No nominations. Volunteer and service groups are invited to Determination attend. Event Description Annual event, not awards, just appreciation. Draws, entertainment, buffet. Town of Ajax Recipient Nominations for 14 categories. Selection committee consists of 2 Determination representatives from each of the advisory committees, chaired by Staff. Event Description Annual themed event, "Volunteer Recognition Awards", with appetizers, decorations and entertainment. Winners receive sculpture with engraved name. 13-13 ATTACHMENT# _�_ -To REPORT/I QW l3 P INAL (Completion rate: 52.27%) 1.Has your organization ever participated in the Clarington Volunteer Recognition/Service Event? Response Chart Percentage Count Yes 39% 14 No 61% 22 Total Responses 36 2.If you answered no above,why not? Response Chart Percentage Count " Wasn't aware of event 55% 12 Hold our own volunteer recognition 14% 3 event Don't track volunteer years of service 0% 0 Too much effort 0% 0 Too difficult to limit it to five individuals 0% 0 Not interested 5% 1 I don't know 14% 3 Other,please specify.:. 14% 3 Total Responses 22 2.If you answered no above,why not?(Other,please specify...) # Response 1. . depends on what organization you think I am with 2. Not sure if BNBA has participated.As for Scouts Canada,they track it themselves. 3. The last time the organization took part was approximately 6 years ago. 3. If your organization has previously participated in Clarington's Volunteer Recognition program,how would you rate the experience 1(Poor) 2 3 4 5(Excellent) Total Responses 0(0-/0) 0(0-/.) 2(14%) 6(43-/.) 6(430/.) 14 13-14 Comments: # Response 1. Events are well organized and appreciated by agency and volunteers. 2. N/A 3. I was once a recipient and appreciated it very much we do not do it for the recognition but it is so nice. 4. Rating 3 We are a board would rate it as a three,seems to be getting more and more informal each time. 5. Cannot comment.Our organization partook in this approximately 6 years ago.Do not know how it went 4.Does your organization keep records regarding volunteers years of service? Response Chart Percentage Count Yes 69% 20 No 31% 9 Total Responses 29 5.Have you personally ever received recognition through the Municipality's Volunteer. Service program? Response Chart Percentage Count Yes 28% 8 No 72% 21 Total Responses - 29 6. Was it meaningful to you? Response Chart Percentage Count Yes 45% 13 No 55% 16 Total Responses 29 13°15 Why? Why Not? # Response 1. It is always nice to be recognized for the work you do in the community 2. An opportunity to meet other citizens who volunteer in the local community. 3, 1 have not received recognition 4. have never been personally recognized but I had to give an answer in order to proceed with the survey 5. That the organization that nominated me thought my contributions were valuable 6. Question 6:N/A.Did not receive recognition through Municipality. 7, we don't do it for the recognition but it is sure nice to receive. $. I appreciated the recognition. 9. Volunteers don't ask for nothing in return we are grateful to help out in the community and the outcome is our satisfaction.Being recognized through this program gives reason to continue doing what we do best. 10. didn't know about it 11. N/a 12, I haven't received recognition 7. Currently an organization can nominate a maximum of 5 volunteers.Do you think that number is appropriate? Response Chart Percentage Count Yes 79% 23 No 21% 6 Total Responses 29 If you answered NO what,in your opinion,would be an appropriate number?Why? # Response 1. Nominate fewer volunteers but have the event every year.You could nominate one per year.)u that way organizations would make it part of their regular duties each year to nominate someone.I may one of the only volunteers left in my organization who even remembers the last one... 2. We need to nominate all who are worthy. 3, 20 to 25-picking 5 out of 250+is just to difficult 8. Currently the Volunteer Service Recognition program is based on award presentations for years of service. Do you think this practice of presenting awards on years of service should be continued? Response Chart Percentage Count Yes 67% 4 No _ 33% 2 "Total Responses 6 13-16 If you answered NO, why not? # Response I A gallant effort in one area for a short term should be worthy of note. 2. it should be about annual contributions,as the volunteer population ages people serving for long periods of time is difficult. 9. Should volunteer awards be presented based on other criteria instead of/in addition to years of service? Response Chart Percentage Count Yes 62% 13 No 38% 8 Total Responses 21 13®17 10. Can you suggest possible categories/criteria? Variable Response Suggestion 1 There are 12 response(s)to this question. Suggestion 2 'There are 9 response(s)to this question. Suggestion 3 There are 7 response(s)to this question. 10.Can you suggest possible categories/criteria? Suggestion 1 # Response 1. How much time they donate 2, Significant effort 3. Creativity and idea sharing 4, the value of the contribution $. Impact to Municipality 6. How the service helps the people of the community 7. Achievement 8. Above and Beyond 9, by event 10, contributions 11, hours served 12, significant contributions made to the association(regardless of years of service) 10.Can you suggest possible categories/criteria?I Suggestion 2 Response 1, the amount of help they give the organization 2. Making a meaningful difference for the community 3. Skill based 4, the number of volunteer hours $. Amount of People Affected 6. The amount of time this person spends weekly,monthly or yearly 7. Number of beneficiaries $, passion/enthusiasm 9, variety of groups assisted 10.Can you suggest possible categories/criteria? Suggestion 3 # Response 1. Willingness to go above and beyond to assist 2, Incredible on day efforts 13-18 3. number of volunteer organizations the nominee may have been active in 4. Why the service this person does is so essential and needed. 5. Difficulty of circumstances. 6. Creativity 7. traits that make them a good volunteer 11. How should Clarington volunteers be recognized? (Check all that apply) Response Chart Percentage Count Banquet 43% 9 Thank You Card/Lettcr 43% 9 Plaque 48% 10 Lapel Pin 43% 9 Public Notification- 62% 13 newsletter/blog/social media Other,please specify... 10% 2 Total Responses 21 1.1.How should Clarington volunteers be recognized?(Check all that apply)(Other,please specify...) # Response I. an evening with light refreshments,a special pin that a person might actually wear,press coverage 2. A Plaque,but only after a significant milestone. 12.If the current event format was to be replaced with a "Volunteer Celebration"where awards were not presented,would your organization continue/be willing to participate? Response Chart Percentage Count Yes 95%a 20 No 5% 1 Total Responses 21 If not,why not? Currently,the several organizations I am involved with do not track volunteer contributions-so it is a mootpoint 13. If discontinuing the current awards format meant that the celebration could include a larger number of volunteers from your organization could attend,would your organization participate? Response Chart Percentage Count Yes 100% 21 No 0% 0 Total Responses 21 13-19 If not,why not? # Response 1, great opportunity to THANK more people.We have over 100 volunteers on our active list and 5 is a very small number.In the present format increasing the number of volunteers each agency could recognize would drag the evening out too much.I would not recommend increasing numbers in the present format,but an opportunity to invite more volunteers to a celebration would be great! 2. 1 don't know what the current format is-larger is good-lots of visual impact to see so many volunteers 14. What would be your-organization's preferred format? Response Chart Percentage Count Status Quo-event held once every 4 35% 8 years(Council term);Maximum of 5 nominees/organization/Council hosted reception/awards ceremony. An Annual casual celebration of 30% 7 volunteers-hosted by Council;no award presentations;larger number of volunteers/organization invited to attend. An Annual Breakfast celebration of 9% 2 volunteers-hosted by Council;no award presentations;larger number of volunteers/organization invited to attend. An Annual Afternoon Drop-in 9% 2 Celebration/Tea-hosted by Council;no award presentations;larger number of volunteers/organization invited to attend. Other,please specify... 17% 4 Total Responses 23 14.What would be your organization's preferred format?(Other,please specify...) # Response 1. Same event but held every year 2. an evening event-NO COCKTAILS-light refreshments-squares,fruit,coffee,cider-at least a certificate or a lapel pin 3. Annual Afternoon Drop-in,but with smaller awards(lapel pins). 4. biannual with award presentations hosted by council with awards presentations 13®20 15. What do you think the Municipality should do to promote Volunteerism in our community? # Response 1. Advertising,facebook,open house 2. Hold recognition event more than once every 4 years.Set criteria like Ontario Volunteer Service awards and follow their format for presentation yearly. 3. Somehow create/manage a central location(web based)where all sporting/art/festivals groups can post requests for volunteers online.Much like a Kiiji.But not limit it to just non-profits,for profit groups(business)also require yearly many volunteers to pull events off.Events that benefit the community and events that the municipality is unable to provide. 4. Is there a data base of organizations that require volunteers with descriptions of what is involved and how much time is needed? 5. Not sure-I think many organizations recognize their own volunteers internally 6. Take a look at how Professional Engineers Ontario recognizes volunteers.I think something akin to this would work very well:http://www.peo.on.ca/index.php?ci_id=23031_id=1 7. what they are doing is wonderful. 8. More media coverage of community volunteers......monthly'volunteer profiles' Volunteers matched with youth(Mentor/mentee approach) Publish volunteer testimonials Volunteer'roadshow'to schools geared towards students eligible for community service hours 9. School Presentations to inform the students on what and how to get involved. Let the youth know what recognition is available to them for the most community hours. Gift card to show appreciation and a certificate for an event participation through the recognition program. Rewards is what the youth look forward to. 10. Be more appreciative of the volunteers we have and make them feet like more then a place to have photo opts. 13-21 Clarington ' REPORT MUNICIPAL CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: N/A Report#: CLD-030-13 File#: Subject: APPOINTMENT TO CLARINGTON MUSEUMS AND ARCHIVES BOARD AND CLARINGTON,ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD-030-13 be received; 2. THAT Michelle Speelman-Viney be thanked for her contribution to the Clarington Museums and Archives Board; 3. THAT Paul Adams be appointed to the Clarington Museums and Archives Board for a term concurrent with the term of Council; 4. THAT Jennifer Forde be thanked for her contribution to the Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee; 5. THAT be appointed to the Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee for a term concurrent with the term of Council; and 6. THAT all interested parties listed in Report CLD-030-13 be advised of Council's decision. by: Reviewed by: �� 1 11,1ell- Submitted 4_P�a�tfi- .- e, CMO ranklin u, unici VlClerk Ahief Administrative Officer PLB/jeg CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 13-22 REPORT NO.: CLD-030-13 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 Clarington Museums and Archives Board: The Clarington Museums and Archives Board (CMAB) is a volunteer board established in 2001 by the Municipality of Clarington Council to manage the Clarington museums and archives. Board members are ultimately responsible to the Municipality of Clarington Council and are bound by By-law 2012-093, which states that the composition shall be comprised of a maximum of 12 voting members comprised of, as reasonably as possible: • 8 Public Representatives being two members from each ward; 1 member representative of the Friends of the Museum; • 1 member representative of the Newcastle Village and District Historical Society; and • 2 appointed members of Council 1.2 Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee: In March 2003, Council passed a resolution to establish the Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee, in accordance with the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2001. The purpose of the Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee is to advise and assist the Municipality in developing and facilitating strategies toward a barrier-free Clarington for citizens with disabilities. This aim shall be achieved through the review of Municipal policies, programs and services and the identification, removal and prevention of barriers faced by persons with disabilities. The terms of reference states that the composition shall be comprised of seven members, of which: Four members shall be persons with disabilities, • One member at large interested in issues related to persons with disabilities, • One member (parent) representing children with disabilities, and • One member of Council to provide continuity between the Committee and Council. 2. CURRENT SITUATION 2.1 Clarington Museums and Archives Board Michelle Speelman-Viney was appointed to the CMAB in January, 2011, as a Ward 1 representative. The Municipal Clerk's Department received her resignation on October 22, 2013, effective November 29, 2013. 13-23 REPORT NO.: CLD-030-13 PAGE 3 Following Council's appointments in 2011, all unsuccessful candidates were advised that their applications would remain on file for consideration should a vacancy occur on the Board. Accordingly, the Municipal Clerk's Department contacted the one Ward 1 previous applicant to the Board to determine whether he wished to put his forward his name for consideration and did not receive confirmation that the applicant was interested by the deadline. Accordingly, the Municipal Clerk's Department proceeded to advertise for the vacancy. During the advertisement period, no new applications were received, but the following previous applicant indicated an interest in the vacancy: • Paul Adams The application for the above-named individual has been circulated under separate cover (Attachment 1) as it contains personal information about the individual. The following members are currently appointed to the CMAB: • Ward 1 Mrs. Marilyn Morawetz • Ward 2 Ms. Bonnie Seto • Ward 2 Mr. Grant Humes • Ward 3 Mrs. Mavis Carlton • Ward 3 Mr. Clayton M. Morgan • Ward 4 Mr. John Witheridge • Ward 4 Mrs. Julie Cashin-Oster • Friends of Museum Mrs. Susan Laing • Council Rep Mayor Foster • Council Rep Councillor Neal The former Executive Director, Martha Rutherford Conrad, of the Clarington Museums and Archives had noted, in correspondence, that the following skills would be an asset to the Clarington Museums and Archives Board: Project Management • Financial Management Marketing/Public Relations • Experience with not-for-profit agencies 2.2 Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee: Jennifer Forde was appointed to the Committee in January, 2011 until her resignation in October, 2013, Following Council's appointments, all unsuccessful candidates were advised that their applications would remain on file for consideration should a vacancy occur. Accordingly, the Municipal Clerk's Department contacted previous applicants to the Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee to determine whether they wish to put forward their name for consideration. 13-24 REPORT NO.: CLD-030-13 PAGE 4 At the time of writing of this report, the following had contacted the Municipal Clerk's Department to confirm that they wished their name to be considered for the vacancy: • Bill Howes • Julie Michalejko-Earle Applications for the above-named applicants have been circulated under separate cover (Attachment 2) as the applications contain personal information about these applicants. 3. CONCURRENCE: Not Applicable 4. CONCLUSION It is respectfully recommended that Michelle Speelman-Viney be thanked for her contribution to the Clarington Museums and Archives Board and Jennifer Forde be thanked for her contribution to the Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee. In order to fulfill the requirements of the Terms of Reference of the Clarington Museums and Archives Board, it is recommended that Paul Adams be appointed to the Clarington Museums and Archives Board, as the Ward 1 representative, for a term concurrent with the term of Council. In order to fulfill the requirements of the Terms of Reference of the Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee, it is recommended that one of the following be appointed to the Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee, for a term concurrent with the term of Council: • Bill Howes • Julie Michalejko-Earle CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk Confidential Attachments (Distributed Separately): Attachment 1: Clarington Museums and Archives Board Application-Paul Adams Attachment 2: Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee Applications 13-25 REPORT NO.: CLD-030-13 PAGE 5 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Paul Adams Jennifer Forde Bill Howes Julie Michalejko-Earle Michelle Speelman-Viney John Witheridge, Chair, Clarington Museums and Archives Board Julia Fielding, Executive Director, Clarington Museums and Archives Board Sylvia Jaspers-Fayer, Chair, Clarington Accessibility Advisory Committee 13-26 a9dfl9tW FINANCE DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: FND-018-13 File#: Subject: TIMING OF SOUTH BOWMANVILLE MULTI-USE FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND-018-13 be received. Submitted by: �! Reviewed by: G�- Nancy aylor, BBA,CPA,CA, Franklin Wu, Director of Finance/Treasurer Chief Administrative Officer NT/hjl CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 15-1 REPORT NO.: FND-018-13 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 At the General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting on October 28, 2013, Committee considered Report CSD-010-13, "Clarington Fitness Centre- Proposed Renovation". The report was tabled to the next GPA meeting. At the November 12, 2013 General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting, the following Resolution #GPA-545-13 was passed: That Report CSD-010-13 be referred to Staff for a further report on when a new multi-use facility is likely to be built in south Bowmanville. 1.2 This resolution was not amended at the Council meeting of November 19th. This report is in response to Council's request. 2. DEVELOPMENT CHARGES STATUS 2.1 As Council is aware, the proposed future facility is contained in the Municipality's Development Charges By-Law and Background Study. It is identified as "South Bowmanville Multi-Use Facility Phase II" at 82,000 square feet. Phase I was comprised of the Bowmanville Indoor Soccer Facility. The proposed timing at the time of the preparation of the DC Background Study was design in 2016 with potential opening in 2018. A good portion of the funding for the project was categorized as accommodating growth in the post 2019 period. 2.2 The intent at the time of the DC Background Study was that Phase 11 would be comprised of the following conceptual components: ® Twin Pad Arena ® Program/Meeting Space ® Fitness Centre ® Racquet Courts ® Lobby/Common Space ® Office and Administration 2.3 The anticipated Phase III would be comprised of a Leisure Pool, Gymnasium and Program/Meeting Space at some time beyond the Phase 11 completion. 2.4 Since the DC Background Study and By-Law were approved, there has also been much discussion surrounding additional space/location for the Clarington Older Adults Association, although no decisions have been made at this time. 3. COMMENTS 3.1 While the DC Background Study includes projections around timing of future facilities, the timing estimate is based on the assumptions at that time around growth, collections, interest earned on reserve fund balances, indexing of capital costs etc. 15-2 REPORT NO.: FND-018-13 PAGE 3 3.2 Unfortunately, while the economy was uncertain at the time and an allowance was made for this, the depth of the economic recession and still ongoing recovery efforts globally and here in Canada were not anticipated at that time. Nor was it predictable that there would be the impact of servicing restraints rippling from lower development charges collections at the Regional level. 3.3 Growth during this five year time frame of the DC Background Study was anticipated to be in the range of 699 to 902 units per year. As Council is aware, this growth level has not been achieved and as a result the deficit in the Indoor Recreation Development Charges Reserve Fund has relatively stabilized at approximately $2.1 million. Essentially, the Municipality needs in the vicinity of 525 new residential units per year to breakeven on the annual debenture payments relating to Indoor Recreation growth related facilities. Growth in units in excess of this would be applied to reduce the current deficit in this Reserve Fund. 3.4 The greatest variable in predicting the timing of proceeding with the South Bowmanville Facility is the number of new units per year. This is tied extensively to both market conditions and servicing restrictions. 3.5 The debenture debt payments pertaining to the South Courtice Arena will be completed in 2017. This frees up indoor recreation development charges cash flow collections. Based upon an average of 550 new residential units per year over the next five years, it is anticipated that the Indoor Recreation Development Charges Reserve Fund will achieve a return to positive conditions at the end of 2018. Any servicing constraints or negative economic impacts would delay this date further. 3.6 As a result, in order to get the Indoor Recreation Development Charges Reserve Fund back on firm positive ground, it would be recommended that an additional facility would not likely be feasible until approximately 2020. This would be the design phase with the facility opening in late 2022. 3.7 The other significant issue to be aware of is that the Development Charges funding can only be utilized towards growth related facilities. This means that replacement of facilities cannot be funded from development charges, only additional square footage added to the municipality's service level. An indepth discussion around development charges shortcomings is covered in a separate report to Committee providing comments to the Province of Ontario's consultation on the Development Charges Act currently underway. 3.8 Specifically to this issue, any replacement square footage for a pool facility would not be eligible for growth related financing. The existing pool would need to remain open concurrently with a new facility for the new facility to be eligible for development charges financing. The same circumstance applies to future discussions around the Older Adults facility or the Courtice library, 15-3 REPORT NO.: FND-018-13 PAGE 4 3.9 This does not prevent Council from proceeding with the provision of improved facilities, but the financing would be recommended as debenture debt financing with annual repayments from tax levy financing. There is sufficient debt capacity available as the Municipal debt levels are well below the allowable capacity approved by the Province. This is also an option for Council should they wish to proceed with the proposed renovation to the Clarington Fitness Centre but do not wish to utilize the reserve fund capacity for this project. 4. CONCURRENCE 4.1 This report has been reviewed by Joseph Caruana, Director of Community Services, who concurs with the recommendations. 5. CONCLUSION 5.1 This report highlights the issues around growth related financing. Based on the assumptions identified in this report, the proposed timing of the new multi-use facility in south Bowmanville would be approximately 2020 for design commencement and late 2022 for facility opening for eligible growth related components. Adjustments to this timing may result from better or worse growth activity in new residential units over the coming years. 5.2 If Council expresses its intent to have a pool facility in the Phase II development and wants it to be eligible for development charges financing, the existing pool would have to remain open concurrently to the opening of a new pool facility. 5.3 If Council wishes to proceed with a replacement pool at the South Bowmanville site, there would be a need to issue debenture debt to be repaid from tax levy on an annual basis. This is also an alternative financing mechanism for the proposed renovations at the existing Clarington Fitness Centre. The balance of the growth related components, unless it was a standalone facility, would have the same timing limitations referenced in Section 5.1 above. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives X Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan 15-4 REPORT NO.: FND-018-13 PAGE 5 Staff Contact: Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance/Treasurer List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Clarington Squash Club Clarington Swim Club i 15-5 REPORT FINANCE DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: FND-019-13 File#: Subject: DEVELOPMENT CHARGES ACT CONSULTATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND-019-13 be received; 2. THAT Attachment "C" be endorsed as the Municipality of Clarington's comments with respect to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing consultations on the Development Charges Act, 1997, parkland dedication and Section 37 of the Planning Act density bonusing; 3. THAT the Province of Ontario be requested to remove Section 5(1), paragraph 8 of the Development Charges Act, the step in "Determination of development charges" that requires municipalities to reduce their capital costs by 10%; 4. THAT the Province of Ontario be requested to update Section 5(1), paragraph 4, which provides that the service levels development charges are based on is an average service level for the previous ten years, with more permissive language whereby municipalities may apply development charges in ways that best suit their local growth-related needs and priorities; 5. THAT the Province of Ontario be requested to eliminate Section 2(4), "Ineligible services," so that all services are eligible for development charges; 6. THAT the the legislation be clearly structured to permit the gross population to be used in determining the allowable funding envelopes for development charges calculations; 7. THAT the Development Charges Act be structured to promote the implementation of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, specifically to facilitate improved transit infrastructure across the entire Greater Golden Horseshoe, to encourage intensification and to minimize future expansions of the urban boundary; CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 15-6 REPORT NO.: FND-019-13 PAGE 2 8. THAT no changes be made to the cash-in-lieu of parkland provisions of the Planning Act; and 9. THAT a copy of this Report, including Attachment "C" be copied to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, Municipal Finance Officers Association, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Submitted by: 111MINI, �,�/�,� Reviewed by: Nancy dylor,/BBA,CPA,CA, Franklin Wu, Director of Finance/Treasurer Chief Administrative Officer NT/hjl 15-7 REPORT NO.: FND-019-13 PAGE 3 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 On August 20, 2013, a review of the municipal development financing regime was announced. It was to include the Development Charges Act, 1997 (DC Act), and the density bonusing and parkland dedication provisions in the Planning Act. On October 24th, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing issued a press release (Attachment "A") and the development charge consultation document (Attachment "B"), launching the consultation process to review the municipal planning process and development financing regime. 1.2 On October 29, 2013 an email went out from MMAH inviting all treasurers to indicate their interest in attending a consultation. Clarington staff participated in a consultation interactive webinar on Friday, November 22nd. The webinar was recorded by MMAH staff so the comments made by Clarington staff in the webinar will be included as input in the Province's consultation process. 1.3 January 10, 2014 is the last day to submit evidence-based concerns and ideas for improving the legislation to MMAH. Clarington was specifically requested to submit written comments based on our participation in the webinar. This report represents staffs recommendations to Council for the Municipality of Clarington's comments to the DC Act consultations by the Province of Ontario. 2 CONTEXT FOR CHANGE 2.1 AMO, in every provincial budget submission since 2008, has called for new Development Charges Act legislation. While the Province has clearly indicated that the Minister is not looking at radical changes to the DC Act, this is a significant opportunity to express municipal concerns with respect to the existing legislation and call for reforms to the DC Act in order to address key concerns. 2.2 AMO has issued four key messages and considerations: • Growth must pay for growth. Development charges are important to ensuring tax equity among property taxpayers; • Discounted development charges can drive up property taxes for all residents; • Delaying infrastructure investments does not eliminate the problem, but can exasperate it; and • If we devalue the public services which support our homes we shortchange our communities and their long term future. 2.3 In 2007, provincial-municipal research and a resulting report identified specific action. "Four priority areas appear to be most inconsistent with the `growth pays 15-8 REPORT NO.: FND-019-13 PAGE 4 for growth' principle." The four areas are ineligible services, the mandatory 10% discount for "soft" services, the 10 year historic average service level cap and the treatment of grants and subsidies. Despite a comprehensive review, no legislative changes were made. 2.4 For the past number of months the Building and Land Development Industry through BILD, has been undertaking an aggressive public campaign for reform to development charges and parkland dedication legislation with a view to reform of applicable legislation reducing cost implications to new growth and/or the development community. This will likely have a negative impact upon municipalities financial capacity. They will also be participating in the MMAH consultation process. 2.5 Metrolinx, in its Big Move transit proposals for the GTHA, is looking for enhanced development charges funding. 2.6 Ontario's Environmental Commissioner released a report in September 2013 also seeking reforms to the DC Act. "Public transit is treated inequitably, despite the clear benefits it provides in addressing traffic congestion" and "statutory limitations were specifically identified as a key barrier for municipalities wishing to enhance their public transit system". 2.7 As Council is aware, the Municipality of Clarington's current DC by-law has been under appeal since it was enacted in 2010. A full hearing is being scheduled for the fall of 2014. 3 COMMON DEVELOPMENT CHARGES MISCONCEPTIONS 3.1 Before diving into specific issues, it is worthwhile to highlight some common misconceptions regarding development charges in order to enhance our understanding of the changes being requested. Municipal Finance Officers Association has prepared a background paper on this topic and the bulk of the information below comes from that backgrounder. 3.2 There is a belief that development charges are high because municipalities provide services at `gold plated' service levels that were not provided to existing residents. The Development Charges Act prevents gold plating in that the ten year average service level cap depresses, not inflates, service levels. If `gold plating' is suspected, a DC by-law can be appealed to the OMB. This is not the basis of the appeal in Clarington. DC increases are generally driven by general cost escalation, elimination of conditional grants for infrastructure and new provincial regulations in some service areas. Particular to Clarington, the development community supported an early update to the DC Background Study and By-law in 2008. A result of a Financial Impact Study in New Growth Areas, it became obvious that the cost of works in the previous Background Study were outdated 15-9 REPORT NO.: FND-019-13 PAGE 5 and a barrier to proceeding with growth related works being requested by developers to proceed. 3.3 A second common complaint is that residential development charges can increase the price of some kinds of housing. Critics suggest that DC's make new homes less affordable. The extent to which developers pass on DC's to new homes depends greatly upon market factors. Many studies question the assumption that the full DC is passed on to the purchaser as many factors influence the cost of housing. Over time, DC's have remained a relatively stable percentage of housing prices (6% to 9% depending upon location). There is a financial impact of not levying DC's on other municipal tax and fee rates charged to all ratepayers. 3.4 Another common belief that has a little more traction is that non-residential DC's can make municipalities less economically competitive. There is a lot of research around how firms make locational and business expansion decisions. The key is to consider the total cost of serviced land acquisition. Particularly in areas where the land costs alone are lower, the combined cost of the DC's and land costs per acre are not necessarily an impediment to development. There are a number of studies that go further'and suggest that current non-residential DC's are not a barrier to economic development. The quality of services and infrastructure appear to be much more significant locational factors. As an indicator, based on municipal Financial Information Returns, many municipalities with comparatively high non-residential charges issued many high value building permits. The challenge in smaller municipalities is that large players in the overall provincial market factor in DC's as a cost of business. However, smaller focal developers do not have the same financial capabilities and since they often already own their location, they are not making tradeoffs between land costs and DC's and therefore often struggle with the DC costs. 3.5 Finally, there is a belief held by some in the development community that some growth related capital should be paid for through property taxes. They feel that there are broad and indirect community benefits associated with people-related services. Unfortunately, existing ratepayers already pay the operating, maintenance and replacement costs for the first round of growth related capital, the full costs of the municipal asset base, as well as existing restrictions under the DCA. 4 COMMENTS 4.1 The Province has requested that submissions be structured as answers to 19 questions they have incorporated into their Development Charges in Ontario Consultation Document (Attachment "B"). As a result, Attachment "C" - Clarington's Comments to the Development Charges Act Consultations is attached to this report and is in the format requested. 15-10 REPORT NO.: FND-019-13 PAGE 6 5 CONCURRENCE This report has been reviewed by David Crome, Director of Planning who concurs with the recommendations. 6 CONCLUSION 6.1 It is recommended that Council endorse the Attachment "C" as Clarington's comments with respect to the current Development Charges Consultations being undertaken by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. 6.2 Based on the comments provided in Attachment "C", specific recommendations around amendment to the current Development Charges Act are provided for Council endorsement. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: x Promoting economic development x Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives x Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance/Treasurer Attachments: Attachment 'A" — Ministry of Municipal Affairs of Housing Press Release- Land Use Planning and Development Charges Review Attachment "B" - Development Charges in Ontario- Consultation Document, Fall 2013 Attachment "C" - Clarington's Comments to the Development Charges Act Consultations List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Development Charge Consultation, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Matthew Wilson, Senior Advisor, Association of Municipalities of Ontario Emily Harris, Municipal Finance Officers Association 15-11 Attachment "A" to FND-019-13 AIR Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Land Use Planning and Development Charges Review October 24, 2013 9:30 a.m. Over the next several weeks, the_Ontario government will be holding workshops across the province. The workshops will collect ideas from participants on making the land use planning and appeals system and the development charges system more effective to ensure they support local and provincial objectives while securing sustainable financing for new development. The goal is to ensure the systems are predictable, transparent, cost-effective and responsive to the changing needs of Ontario's communities. Discussion papers on land use planning and development charges are available-at ontario.ca/landuseplanning, where interested individuals can also provide their feedback and suggestions. Feedback is being requested on: how to improve the province's land use planning system, including what can be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) accountability and transparency measures for development charges and other tools that exchange community benefits for increased density, such as parkland dedication and section 37 benefits (i.e., community infrastructure investments). Specific issues related to land use planning and development not within the scope of this review are: • eliminating or changing the OMB's operations, practices and procedures • removing or restricting the provincial government's approval role and ability to intervene in planning matters • removing municipal flexibility in addressing local priorities • changing the "growth pays for growth" principle of development charges • education development charges and the development charges appeal system creating additional fees and/or taxes Q hatters involving other legislation, unless minor housekeeping changes are needed. i��ike P iaka Minister's Oi�ice Available 416-585-6842 Re RF Available Online Disponible en FranGais May Nazar Communications Branch 41 6-585-7066 15-12 11/25/13 Land Use Planning and Appeal and Development Charges Systems Re\iew Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing nta l ABOUT I NEWSROOM I JOB OPPORTUNITIES I CONTACT US You are here > Home > Your Ministry > Land Use Planning > Land Use Planning and Appeal and Development.._Charges Systems Review Land Use planning and Appeal and Development Charges Systems Review ...................................................................................................................................................,................................................ ................................................................................................................ ...................... The Government of Ontario is taking a look at the way cities and towns plan for development and how. to help pay for it. We want to ensure that the land use planning and appeal systems, and the development charges system are predictable, transparent and cost effective. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is consulting from October 2013 to January 2014 across the province with the public, municipalities and stakeholders on what changes to the systems are needed. Scope of the review We want to hear your suggestions on: • how we can improve the province's land use planning systems, including what can be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) • the Development Charges Act • parkland dedication • section 37 of the Planning Act, which enables a municipality to negotiate with a developer for items such as affordable housing in exchange for permission for the developer to build in excess of zoning limits Please note that, while we are interested in hearing your views, at this time we are not considering recommendations that would result in a complete overhaul of the Planning Act. More specifically, this consultation will not discuss or consider: • eliminatinq or changing the OMB's operations, practices and procedures relm ovin^y or restricting t le provincial government's approval role and ability to Inter`'en-- in matter • removing municipal flexibility in addressing local priorities • changing the "growth pays for growth" principle of development charges • education- development charges and the development charges appeal system other fees and taxes and matters involving other legislation, unless housekeeping changes are needed. Comments on issues that are not the focus of the consultation will be shared with the ministries responsible. You are invited to share your comments and ideas by 9a€n-aa€y -10, '1014. 15-13 w%vd.mah.g ov.on.ca/Pag e10355.aspx 1/2 11/25/13 Land Use Planning and Appeal and Development Charges Systems Retiew Select the system you wish to comment on for more information and to find out how to participate. • Land Use Planning and Appeal System (Workshops) • Development Charges System . 15-14 \--w n-oh.gov.on.ca/Pagel0355.aspx 2/2 {�.� a� ���"'s�a�.as���.•-! s��`�' �r� r° i3 ,s�, ✓ � �„� � tom, t "4 � '* £ .r`tr '„yi .,.'t` '•,arc-�" `S 't.f' l" ..vi .v✓ r-T. .a'� r �r�.e f ■ • �. -r.,s: ,er �. '� �"� ,r��""' �s. x,�,' .;t � D-z r,' � r*a r-s� 3��'x"'�' ■ • oil� .�z ✓�'✓�"'�,"""�.'' f�('' �%r �r'"t�� cam'�. !.".3y k.:/! ."-- 3� S-F, ;f ✓ C ,,�i�Y x< :3' .'-r s: y£i ,c r2'v r ,'"a �" `.^" i ''�T '.X�,..✓ .rt.-N .Q '�j� t �* a��,aG�..�,y, h :;?„' Ya �'`;7s✓'Z+'� ✓ ,"� tz� .�iu" :..�'�l :�''.�s�" w.l'..3��, .ft�•"'�f Z�p�. 3, fy r' � � .:s �. "�c-°:..,� NVO Amoco ��,�f3 yt'�r r'r�'r r�:'.. "s .� �s� ��'5..� � "., ( ,:�rf �.�jC .'�zY��.�3� ..�� i< k. �:�a r°�✓.a���n��s: �� f<�.���t a�:r„��_'.�_s r�.r.� �"�,,� � 3w�- CPC . ,.'ryu' '�. r"f r; ✓ :r,��'-'�'c a;� ry:. .v.kss r3: �� �`,` ""`° ^-`n "" 's �'o-s°4s'�'"., f "rc. �""a.",t-°;�;Gz`C.S� z::✓ �� Y.1'�p �t'�1 t ��`.� S,,gg'����F✓�d '"�'�9 2�.. -� � 'I �,��Y..0��_ ..��;,� :sr"�' a {" ,x,,. .:,%'r�a Fes^ � ,'-`-�,�..'�� .r ✓`svY"r. �5� '..� #� �r��a``3"�.<+��� �. ✓J3�:?,� "�Z��v�c�'N�,�� ��.,,mss".�,.����,w y .;.r);xs.�i / "l "r -;x ✓a} c1" ... f `f- "�(< }• sn's; y,'sA� ,,v�zt >"0 �.,�^.�y4 ,.�.�, Y��, ��."" : � � y� aj�g.��.:� 1C � f � .`r,"'�i';f"'.y�,i`of '` .✓t✓s��s' `;P""t �"s�Z=,� .Y., � ��'�" .,�, �-.`��i'"�����s �� ..�y 3'�� adz x^�' s,�H x "'r �?!`S•'yY.:!"� � I�d .� :::�. h rr ,�C I€F a`.'c2`'?,a.�-'-h f�,,,L.�� `r��� -( 3;�.r�r'� ,.W,�r"-�L�S ..GZ'4-'sx ,.sE ". � � t�1i"�t� 3"�i":�/.,r, r>�"s�' r ✓"�.;'.r �..�tl,". ��... �r �v � .,�;, �����r g k. ����.�-'v'7x' a5. ��.,!k.',.z' ,� ° 'sM rqx F . � s PRE Development Charges ,Act, 1997 Review Consultation Document Ontario is reviewing its development charges system, which includes the Development Charges Act and related municipal measures that levy costs on development (i.e. section 37 and parkland dedication provisions of the Planning Act), to make sure it is predictable, transparent, cost-effective and responsive to the changing needs of communities. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is consulting in the fall of 2013 with municipalities, the building and development industry and other key stakeholders on what changes to the system are needed. This document is intended to help focus the discussion and identify potential targeted changes to the current framework. Development Charges Act, 1997 The Development Charges Act, 1997 lays out Ontario's regulatory and legislative framework which municipalities must follow to levy development charges. This legislation resulted from negotiations with municipalities and developers and is based on the core principle that development charges are a primary tool in ensuring that "growth pays for growth". Development Charges Act; 1997 Processes To determine a development charge, a municipality must first do a background study. The background study provides a detailed overview of a - municipality's anticipated growth, both Did you know` residential and non-residential; the services 200 of Ontario's municipalities collect needed to meet the demands of growth; and a development charges. detailed account of the capital costs for each infrastructure project needed to support the $1.3 D in development charge reve'nue was growth. The growth-related capital costs collected in 2011. identified in the study are then subject to deductions and adjustments required by the Development charges accounted for 14 per legislation. These include: cent of municipal tangible asset acquisition Identifying services ineligible for a .financing rsS 2011 development charge.The reason some services are exempt from y development charges is that they are considered "discretionar✓' Qnl.l I lot IG4urr4lA fl.tr 4~1G V G_ I I IGnl to 1-!Ul,tU1 iii.g. entertainment I G'.no %, lul Ql fald lu zoo . Y Requiring a seM- ce level cap tied to a ten-year historical average. Capital costs for each service t11E1st be reduced Fred by the G4SiS associated with a service level gr e ater than a 10-yeat historical average. This ensures new resident/business do not receive a service level greater than that provided to current residents/businesses. Development Charge Consultation Document Page.1 l- Ontario 15-16 • Reducing capital costs by the amount of growth-related infrastructure that benefits existing development. For example, installation of a new transit line needed to service growth becomes part of the overall municipal system and therefore also benefits existing residents. Municipalities must estimate the financial.impact,of this benefit and reduce growth-related capital costs accordingly. • Reducing capital costs by an amount that reflects any excess capacity for a particular service. Municipalities must account for uncommitted excess capacity for any municipal service for which they levy a development charge. For example, if a municipality wants to construct a new library they must examine if the current municipal library system is at capacity. If the system is not at capacity, a deduction to growth-related capital costs for the new library must be made. An exception is made if a municipal council indicates that excess capacity at the time it was created is to be paid for by new development. • Reducing capital costs by adjusting for grants, subsidies or other contributions. If a municipality receives a grant, subsidy or other contribution for a municipal service for which a development charge is being levied growth-related capital costs must be reduced to reflect the grant, subsidy or other contribution: This attempts to prevent "double-dipping". • Reducing capital costs for soft services (e.g. parkland development, transit, libraries) by 10 per cent. The legislation specifically identifies seven municipal services for which growth-related capital costs are not subject to a 10% discount (i.e. water, wastewater, storm water, roads, electrical services, police and fire). All other services are therefore subject to a 10% discount. This measure was put in place so that a portion of growth-related costs is paid out of municipal general revenues. The deductions and adjustments attempt to identify the capital cost that can be attributed to the infrastructure needed to service growth and development. Therefore, revenue municipalities raise through development charges will help ensure growth-related capital costs are not borne by existing taxpayers. While the,legislation provides for deductions and adjustments_, in some instances the Act does not specify how these are determined by municipalities. For example, municipalities must account for the impact of Did you know? grovAh-related infrastructure benefits on existing development but the Act does not say how this impact is Bard services, such as roads, to be calculated. water, sewer and waste water, account for 67 per cent of all Based on an analysis of current background studies for collection. 19 of the largest municipalities in Ontario (single and lower tier) capital costs recovered from development greater T orvnto Area charges on average accounted for 44 per cent of gross municipalities collect 70 per cent ranital Pk nPnriifi urP PCtIt {G1teC f(lt CP.i\!i(VPC flint writ 11C1 hp- of all development charges in eligible for development charges. At a regional level �En°°r°c• (Durham, Halton, York and Peel) development charges recovered 63 per cent of gross capital expenditures (See Appendix Figure 1). Development Charge Consultation Document Page 2 { r r. �€mar i ' 15-17 Eligible Services _ The Development Charges Act, 1997 sets out specific services on which development charges cannot be imposed to pay for growth-related capital costs. This is a = significant change from the Development Charges Act, 1989 which Did you know? gave municipal councils the authority to pass by-laws imposing In 2011, 37 municipalities charges on all forms of development to recover the net capital costs collected $74.2M in of services related to growth. transit development charges; reserves stood The scope of services funded under the Act was reduced by at$259.4M. eliminating services which are not considered essential for new development and which benefit the community more broadly. Without the 10 per cent discount applied to Municipalities have argued that a number of services that are transit development currently ineligible,•such as hospitals and waste management should charges,' municipalities . be made eligible services for a development charge..Municipalities would have collected an would also like to recover the full cost of new growth associated with ' additional $8.2M. particular services that are currently subject to a-discount, such as transit. The collection of development charges for transit is subject to a 10 per cent discount along with services such as parkland development, libraries, daycares, and recreational facilities. -This broad category is generally referred to as "soft services" as opposed to "hard" services, such as roads and water which are not subject to the discount. The 10 per cent discount is seen as a way of ensuring that municipalities do not "gold plate" services with development money above and beyond general municipal standards. $30,000,000.00 Transit Development Charge Collections 2010 $25,000,000.00 02011 Selected Municipalities 2010 and 2011 $20,000,000.00 $15,000,000.00 $10,000,000.00 $5,000,000,00 $0.00 G Q G AFL G G a o° Qee\SS`SSav�� o�x or 0 `aa,,e o� t� Development Charge Consultation Document I Page 3 �'1)ntar to 15-18 Services for which a development charge is levied are also Did you know? subject to the 10-year historical service average cap. Municipalities and transit supporters have suggested that A number of recent reports (i.e. transit levies be based on a peak or forward- looking Metrolinx Investment Strategy, service average. This would potentially allow municipalities Environmental Commission of to better co-ordinate transit infrastructure with planned Ontario and Environmental growth. Defence) have advocated for amendments to the Development Charges Act, 1997, reflecting those made for the Toronto-York Subway Extension, for all transit projects in Ontario. Transparency and Accountability Public input Municipalities must pass a development charge by-law within one year of the completion of a'background study. Before passing the by-law, a municipality is required to hold at least one public meeting, making both the by-law and background study publicly available at least two weeks before the meeting. The content of a by-law may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) within 40 days of passing, after which the imposition of a specific development charge may be challenged within 90 days of the charge payable date. The OMB has broad powers to change or cancel (repeal) a by-law or to make the municipality do so. A number of appeals that are launched are settled between the parties involved before the Board makes a decision. If the Board orders a change to the by-law, it is considered to have come into force on the day that the by-law was passed. The municipality may then need to refund any amounts owed to anyone who paid the higher charge, with interest, within 30 days of the decision. Reserve Funds Municipalities must establish an "obligatory" reserve fund for each service for which a development charge is collected. The development,charge funds must be spent on the infrastructure projects for which they were collected. In 2011, municipalities collected $1,313 in development charges and had $2.7B in obligatory reserves funds. Most development charges are Collected for non-discounted services with roads, water and wastewater infrastructure accounting for the largest share. Each year the treasurer of a municipality is required to submit a development charge statement to council ................ Development Charge Consultation Document Page 4 " Ontano 15-19 and to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and. Housing, providing a detailed account of activities for each reserve fund. The statement must show the connection between the infrastructure project and the reserve fund supporting it-. Despite the thoroughness of the-development charge background study and the requirement to prepare and submit an annual development charge reserve fund statement, questions have arisen as to whether or not the funds collected are spent on projects for which they were intended. Planning Act: Section 37 (Density Bonusing) and Parkland Dedication The Planning Act allows municipalities to receive "benefits"from development in exchange for allowing greater density(more compact form of development) and to require developers to contribute land.for parks or other recreational use. Section 37 (Density Bonusing) - Section 37 (Density Bonusing) allows local municipal councils to authorize increases in the height and density of development beyond the limits set out in their zoning by-law, provided they have enabling official plan policies, in exchange for providing specified facilities, services or matters, such as the Section 37 "Cash4n-lieu" Financial Compensation $160,000 - - Secured, Received & Spent: Toronto,. 2007-2011 - s $137,869 $140,000 -- - o Out of the total 386 benefits received in 0 $120,000 Toronto between 2007-2011, 179 were in kind - benefits and 207 were "cash-in-lieu". $100,000 $80,000 L � -' $63,569 $60,000 Lills $40,00'0 $20,000 $10;990---"----- $O Financial Compensation Secured Received to Date, Spent Eo Date Recreated from:Section 37:What'Benefits'and For Whom?,Aaron A.Moore(institute of Municipal Finance and governance) ' provision of public art, or affordable housing or other matter provided on or in close proximity to the Development Charge Consultation Document I Page 5 � Ontario 15-20 property being developed. Municipalities often undertake planning exercises through extensive public consultation to identify how their communities will grow, resulting in the adoption,official plans to reflect their vision. The application of section 37 (Density Bonusing) may be seen as departing from that approved community vision. Consequently, the application of section 37 (Density Bonusing) has sometimes been characterized as being ad hoc or unstructured. As well, questions have been raised about whether the payments are being used for the intended purpose and whether the appropriate accountability and reporting measures are in place. Parkland Dedication Municipalities have the authority to require that a developer give a portion of the development land to a municipality for a park or other recreational purposes either at the plan of subdivision approval or consent approval stage (Planning Act, subsection 51.1(1)) or as a condition of development or redevelopment of land f Planning Act, section 42). Instead of giving over the land, the municipality may require the developer to pay an amount of money equal to the value of the land that would have otherwise been given. This is known as cash-in-lieu. In addition, municipalities have the ability to require an alternative parkland dedication rate, which is based on the principle that parkland dedicated should bear some relation to population and need. Under subsection 42(3) of the Planning Act, an alternative parkland dedication rate of up to a maximum of 1 hectare per 300 dwelling units may be imposed. In order to use this, a municipality's official plan must have specific policies dealing with the use of the alternative parkland dedication rate. The alternative parkland dedication rate was enacted to correct an inequity because.parkland conveyances based on a percentage of lot area did not provide enough parkland for higher density residential areas. The philosophy of setting an upper limit for the Alternative Rate enables municipalities to set their own standards in relation to clearly demonstrated needs. These needs must be reflected in the goals', objectives and policies of the official plan to avoid unjustified use of higher conveyance standards. Concerns have been identified that the alternative parkland dedication rate in the Planning Act acts as a barrier to intensification and makes it more difficult to reach the intensification goals of the Provincial Policy Statement, set out in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Overall, concerns have been raised that there is a need for more accountability and transparency with section 37 (Density Bonusing) and parkland dedication. Development Charge Consultation Document Page 6 �6s�a In I ; 15-21 Voluntary Payments Several municipalities require developers to make "voluntary payments" to help pay for infrastructure costs over and above development charges. Municipalities get additional funding from the development community to help finance capital projects so as to potentially reduce the impact of growth on tax rates and the municipality's debt capacity limits. Econo:a6c Growth Many stakeholders view the use of development charges as either a help or hindrance to economic Did yo know? growth in communities. Most of the discussion has focused on housing affordability and the development Based on information obtained of transit, as mentioned above. from Will Dunning Inc. Economic Research, 322,1100 jobs and $17.1 B The housing sector plays a significant role in economic in earnings resulted from the growth in Ontario. This is a key sector that stimulates 75,742 housing starts in Ontario in the economy through linkages with other,sectors, and is 920121.*In the same year, 25,416 a leading employer in the Province. � healthy housing Toronto housing starts created sector can have positive economic and employment 89,000 jobs and resulted in $4.7 B impacts in many other sectors. For example, new home in wages.. - construction can relate to expenditures for building materials, architectural services, construction crews and contractor services, in addition to other additional costs such as landscaping improvements, new furniture and moving expenses. Incomes generated from employment in this sector have a direct impact on consumer spending. Housing Affordability Since the Development Charges Act, 11997 was passed, development charges have risen steadily, leading some people to suggest development charges are having a direct impact on rising housing prices. Housing price increases can be due to several factors including (but not limited to) the general health of the economy, income levels, availability of financing, interest rate levels, cost of construction, material and land values. For example, from 19900 to 2005 the composite Construction Price Index for seven census metropolitan areas across Canada rose by 53.5 per cent. The index for Toronto has increased by 57.2 per cent and for Ottawa by 52.6 per cent. Subsequently, increasing construction costs would be one factor leading to Development Charge Consultation Document Page 7 (Nk, it 15-22 rising development charge rates. Analysis of development charges for Ontario's 30 largest municipalities shows rates, in some cases, have . risen substantially since,1997 (see Appendix Figure 3). Most of the municipalities experiencing larger than average increases in development charges are also ones which have.experienced high.levels of growth. . Despite the increases, development charges as a percentage of the cost of a new home have remained somewhat stable (5 per cent to 9 per cent) since the Act first came into force. (See Appendix Figure,4) Non-residential Development Charges The Act also allows municipalities to levy charges for non-residential development. The way in which municipalities treat non-residential development charges may play a significant role in the attraction of industrial, commercial and institutional development. Such development can act as a lever in informing the location of employment/employers, residential neighbourhoods, transportation networks, and transit. Some municipalities provide exemptions for particular types of non-residential development to address job creation and growth in their municipality. For example, the Cities of Toronto and Kingston exempt development charges for all industrial development and the Town of Kincardine waives the development charaes for all maior'office development. Girowth, ontenslifi1cation and the DeveQepirei t I%Cft�ha.r'ges Act, 199 Over the last decade, two provincial plans have been released that promote the importance of incorporating intensification in growth planning. The Provincial Policy Statement, integrates all provincial ministries' land use interests and is applicable province-wide, states that there should be sufficient land made available through intensification and redevelopment and, if necessary, designated growth areas, to accommodate an appropriate range and mix of employment opportunities, housing and other land uses. The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, which was developed to better manage growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe through compact, complete communities, support for a strong economy, efficient use of land and infrastructure, the protection of agricultural land and natural areas, seeks to focus growth within intensification areas. Intensification areas include urban and intensification growth centres, intensification corridors, major transit stations areas, inf ill/redevelopment/bro`,rjnfield sites and the expansion or conversion of existing buildings and greyfields. T4. I L 1 The T.. rt L 111e regiona. transportation plan, .he Dig Move: 1 .ansforming . .anspol�aiicn in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), released by l��etrolinx in 2008, is consistent with the implementation of these Development Charge Consultation Document Page 8 'M €o 15-23 provincial policies by helping to shape growth through - intensification. Did you k n bw 7 To steer growth and Under the current Development Charges Act, 1997, encourage greater density, the municipalities may apply development charges in ways that City of.Ottawa'levies alower best suit their local growth-related needs and priorities. A development charge ($16,447 number of municipalities use local development charges as per Single Detached Unit) for an incentive for directing land and building development development within the inner through reductions and exemptions of development charges boundary of the city's in areas such as downtown cores, industrial and designated Greenbelt than commercial areas and in transit nodes and corridors, where areas beyond the outer higher-density growth is desired. boundary of the Greenbelt Municipalities may also set area-rated development charges ($24,650 per Single Detached that reflect the higher cost of infrastructure needed to service Unit) . lands that are distantly located outside of higher density, serviced .areas. These charges reflect a localized need for development-related capital additions to support anticipated development. There is significant Interest in using development charges more strategically by discounting development charges where growth and development is preferred, while seising maximum payable charges in areas outside of existing service areas (e.g. greenfields). Questions have been raised over whether this strategy is being fully utilized to achieve intensification in areas such as transit, nodes and corridors. There is concern that levying development charges generally halts growth in areas targeted for intensification and that waiving development charges in these areas should be considered to stimulate development. Development Charge Consultation Document Page 9 ji i661F FCe: 15-24 ISSUES ARID QUESTIONS TO DISCUSS 1. Does the development charge methodology support the right level of investment in growth - related infrastructure? 2. Should the Development Charges Act, 1997 more clearly define how municipalities determine the growth-related capital costs recoverable from development charges? For example, should the Act expilcitly define what is meant by benefit to existing development? 3. Is there enough rigour around the methodology by which municipalities calculate the maximum allowable development charges? 4. The Development Charges Act, 1997 prevents municipalities from collecting development charges for specific services, such as hospitals and tourism facilities. Is the current list of ineligible services appropriate? 5. The Development Charges Act, 1997,-aiiows municipalities to collect 100% of growth-related capital costs for specific services. All other eligible services are subject to a 10% discount. Should the list of services subject to a 10 % discount be re-examined? 6. amendments to the Development Charges Act, 1997 provided Toronto and York Region an exemption from the 10 year historical service level average and the 10% discount for . growth-related capital costs for the Toronto-York subway-extension. Should the targeted amendments enacted for the Toronto-York Subway Extension be applied to all transit r- projects in Ontario or oniv high-order (e.g. subways, light rail) transit projects? - e 7. Is the requirement to submit a detailed reserve fund statement sufficient to determine now municipalities are spending reserves and whether the funds are being spent on the projects for thev were collected? Q< Should thedevelopment charge es�rFs fi�rnos �tctea=cents be c har broadl a6°aisas"Ble to the Dublic, far e)carnple, reciuiring i andateElv pos'ing Oil a n-unicipal %website? 9. Should the reporting requirements of the reserve funds be more prescriptive, if so, how? wp Development Charge Consultation Document Page 10 y vi 15-25 10.How cart Section 37 and parkland dedication processes be made more transparent and accountable? 11.How can these tools be used to support the goals and objectives of the Provincial Policy Statement and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe? 12.What role do voluntary payments outside of the Development Charges Act, 1997 play in developing complete communities? 13.Should municipalities have to identify and report on voluntary payments received frorn developers? 14.Should voluntary payenents be reported in the annual reserve fund statement, which municipalities are required to submit to the [Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing? 15.How can the impacts of development charges on housing affordabilitv be mitigated in the facture? 15.How can development charges better support economic growth and iob creation in Ontario? • - • ® e 17.flow can the Development Charges Act, 1997*better support enhanced intensification and densities to meet both local and provincial obiectives? 18.How prescriptive should the framework be in mandating tools Ike -Area=,,ating and rrIargin ai cost pricing 1y.�.1�hat is the best way to o fsei the development chgz ici;e incentives related- to dens-LK Development Charge Consultation Document Page 11 SL�� "' � � C).ntar j 15-26 SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS AND IDEAS You are invited to share your comments and ideas by January 10, 2014. You can: Share your views at a meeting. Submit your comments through an online version of this guide at t www.ontario.ca/landuseplanninq Environmental Bill of Rights Registry Number: 012-0281 www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ * Email a submission to DCAconsultationCcD-ontario.ca ''"';• Write to us at: Development Charge Consultation Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Municipal Finance Policy Branch 777 Bay Street, 13`h Floor, Toronto, ON M5G 2E5 Preparing an Email or Mdiaii Submission Please structure your submission as answers to the question listed above or submit responses in each of the theme areas. Personal Information Personal information you provide is collected under the authority of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Act. Development Charge Consultation Document ( Page 12 , 15-27 NOTES Development Charge Consultation Document Page 13 V Ontario 15-28 Appendix Figure 1 Potential Development Charges Recoverable as a Percentage of Estimated Gross Capital Costs $:.. 112;475;000 39 . 93%1,678;874;000:00 $Bram p-ton , 0 Clarington $ 254,239,710.00 $ 20,571,670.00 $ 201,312,480.00 8% 79% Oakville*1 $ 823,629,200:00 $: . :_107,088,800.60; $ 642;754,800.00 13% Ajax $ 179,644,683.00 $ 14,802,562.00 $ 132,178,950.00 8% 74% han*;:' _.:. $ ;;;.643,512;000.00 $" F'36;829;600 00 '$: 460,066;400 00 6/ Ji% Vaug Mississauga $ 989,730,700.00 $ 30,593,000.00 $ 700,515,500.00 3% 71% 80,,927;290 00 $.„ 272;745;844 00 18% 62% Kitchener $ 390,672,800.00 $ 89,942,800.00 $ 228,426,500.00 23% 58% Hamilton. $ , _;:1;781,878,533:00 $__ 631,516,015.00. 3516 ,:.._::58% London $ 1,729,685,700.00 $ 227,041,600.00 $ 967,697,900.00 13% 56% Markham:s $ 1494,+277,927.0 _70,$ 7Q;414,681.OJ: $: 818,602,146"00 8% 55% Oshawa $ 193,128,184.00 $ 11,511,939.00 $ 104,370,560.00 6% 54% Guelph. $ 404,908,107:00 .$. :,i`-.951688,376.00 $ ':. `.:"211;504,251 Q0 .. '.':.::.;24% 52% Kingston $ 190,705,912.00 $ 42,827,072.00 $ 79,647,807.00 22% 42% GreaterSudhury $ =221,107;300.00 90;886,50000 :`-39% . - :4i% 85,916,000.00 .$:.; Burlington $ 229,077,092.00 $ 45,917,472.00 $ 90,150,635.00 20% 39% Barrie:.. $ 748,574,393.00 $ 528,657,074.60 1:$::::+ _;287,251,520.00. .:: _ 17% -:. :. Pickering $ 303,321,897.00 $ 84,875,990.00 $ 55,980,222.00 28% 18% Toronto- " $: :'8;728;196,882:00 $•:. :2,469,202,375.00 .$_ 1',560,139,984.00. .; 28% -:.:: 18% Total $ 21,426,020,989.00 $ 4,386,198,716.00 $ 9,508,786,430.00 20% 44% Peel Reion $ 5,409,160,201.00 $ 347,247,987.00 $ 4,422,521,625.00 6% 82% Halton kegion $'.`'`'4,393,600;000.00 $ `598,600,O00 Q0 :$:` 3;576,100,000.00. 14% 81% Durham Region $ 3,941,500,000.00 $• 908,900,000.00 $ 2,505,300,000.06 23% 641% Y6&Region. $ .'14,368,403;527.00 $ 1,572,260;757.00 '$ -7,134,128,076:00 `ll% - 50% Total $ 28,112,663,728.00 $ 3,427,008,744.00 $ 17,638,049,701.00 12% 63% Total ST/LT/Regions $ 49,538,684,717.00 $ 7,813,207,460.00 $ 27,146,836,131.00 16% 55% Note: Based on information contained in current municipal background studies. *Net of Subsidies. **Benefit to Existing Development To determine a development charge,a municipality must first do a background study. The background study provides a detailed overview of a municipality's anticipated growth,both residential and non-residential;the services needed to meet the demands of growth;and a detailed account of the capital costs for each infrastructure project needed to support the growth. The chart is designed to show the how much revenue municipalities recover from development charges based on the infrastructure capital costs related.for municipal services considered in the background study. Using Kingston as an example,the background study identified capital costs of$190.7 M. After making the deductions and adjustments required by the legislation Kingston was able to recover$79.6 M from development charges representing 42%of all capital costs identified in the background study. Benefit to Existing Development (B.ED.) is highlighted to show the deduction municipalities must make to account for the benefit growth-related infrastructure provides to existing residents. Source: Based on information contained in current municipal background studies. Development Charge Consultation Document Page 14 � �rfn r IE`4 15-29 Figure 2 Determining Recoverable Development Charge Costs($Millions) Expepolture $eMCe Leal Capacity= Discount' Nef Toronto. $8,72820 $910.70' $2,469.20 $762.80 $2,956.10 $69.20 $1,560,10 18% Uxbridge $26 00 $1120 $3 00 = $034 $1140 44% Region of Waterloo $4,393,0 $10.10 . $598.60 $203,90 $4,80 $3,576,2 81% a Expeodlture Service Leal Capacify Discount Net Toronto $1,485.00 $531.10 $120.50 $27.20 $475,80 $33.10 $297.60 20% Region ofWaterloo $100,30 $1180 ' $6620 $220 $20;10 20%° To determine a development charge,a*municipality must first do a background study. The background study provides a detailed overview of a municipality's anticipated growth, both residential and non-residential;the services needed to meet the demands of growth; and a detailed account of the capital costs for each infrastructure project needed to support the growth. The chart above indicates the various deductions and adjustments municipalities must make to the capital costs for each infrastructure project needed to support the growth. Using Uxbridge as an example,the municipality is able to collect 44%of the capital costs identified in the background study from development charges. Source: Based on information contained in current municipal background studies for Toronto, Uxbridge and Region of Waterloo Development Charge Consultation Document Page 15 � " 0n In r 0 15-30 Figure 3 Historical Perspectives of Municipal Development Charges Greater.Sudbury ": $2,450,00 ::.. -.:$3 079.00 =$14,829 00 ;505% Mississauga $3,333.53 $6,442.56 $16,887.11 407% Toronto $4;370 00 =. 812,366.00 $19412 00 344% London $5,152.00 $13,714.00 $17,009.00 230% Brantford' $4;763 00 $9,305:00 ::$15;017 00 215% Markham $7,170.00 $10,174.00 $22,357,00 212% Cambridge $4,322.(A. $7,322.20 $11;78800 173% Kingston $5,608.00 $9,490.00 $15,138,00 170% . Ctakville T $9;620 00 $12;044,00 $25;530.00 165% Barrie $13,728.00 $26,060.00 $30,707.00 124% Guelph $11,:721,00 ;..$24;053:00 $24,208.00 - 102% Waterloo City $5,750.00 $13,372.00 $11,75100 104% Windsor $9,006.00: $15,787:.00 . _:._:$17;792.00 ;'98% Clarington $8,377.00 $14,623.00 $15,518.00 85% Frampton $14;029.59.. $24,41509 $25;518.97 82% Richmonnd Kill $7,002.00 $11,654.00 $12,152.001 74% Kitchener(Suburban): $5;634:00 $9,887:00 ;.$9,662.00 71% Vaughan $7,922.00 $12,284.00 $12,715.001 61% Whitby . `$7,722.00 $10,208:00. $12;058 00. : 56% Ajax $7,709.001 $11,631,00 $12,029.*001 56% Of#awa'(inside Greenbelt} $10;566.00 $15;445.00 $16;44700 56% Hamilton $7,887.00 $10,014.00 $10,445.00 32% Pickering- $7,813.00' $9;694.00 $10,114;00 29% Oshawa $6,232.00 $6,920.00 $7,256.00 16% Bur lir, on gt $2;075.00 $7,538:00 ::$8,018.00 13% Chatham-Kent $1,013.00 $4,640.00 NA $a>64507 Rates are those for Single Detached units. When the current legislation came into force municipalities that wished to levy a development charge were required to enact a development charge by-law.The initial by-laws are referred to as first generation by-laws,generally enacted in 1998 to 2000 period. The legislation requires municipalities to undertake a new background study at least once every five years and enact a new by-law based on the new study. In the 2003 to 2005 period municipalities began the process of preparing new background studies and new by-laws. These by-laws are referred to as second-generation. Third-generation by-lauds represent the renewal process municipalities undertook in the 2008 to 2010 period. Source: Based on information contained in current municipal background studies for Toronto, Uxbridge and Region of Waterloo. Development Charge Consultation Document Page 16 Ontario 15-31 Figure 4 Development charges and Cost of New Housing 60,000 ®1996 ' ®1999 132004 6 50,000 ®2007 ®2010 us 9% m 40,000 m rY 7 m 9% `m v 30,000 6% 6% 6% 6% d/. E6% 5/ 8% 8 6% 5� 6% oa 6% 7%sx 20,000- q% 7% 5% 69%/. 6% ai 5% 7% 5% 5/e.. 1% 5% 5% 1% 10,000 q 1% O -- - -- - - Ottawa Durham I,hfaterloo York(Vaughan) Peel Halton Toronto (Nepean) t hitby) (Cambridge) (Missisauga) (Oakville) Note:Toronto data for 1996 and 1999 was not available. The chart indicates the impact development charge have on the cost of new housing. For example,for Mississauga development charges have historically comprised 5 to 7 percent of the cost of a new house. Source: Information for 1996, 1999,2004 was compiled for the Ministry by CN Watson and Associates. Data for 2007 and 2010 was prepared by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing based on municipal development charge by-laws and housing price data from CMHC. Development Charge Consultation Document Page 17 ntano 15-32 ATTACHMENT C TO FND-019-13 Clarington 's Comments to the- Development Charges Act Consultations ISSUES AND QUESTIONS TO DISCUSS The Development Charges Process 1. Does the development charge methodology support the right level of investment in growth-related infrastructure? Clarington holds the position that there should be maximum flexibility within the Act for local Councils to set.DC's that recover the cost of growth in their municipalities and that respect their local intentions regarding economic development. Clearly following from this is that the current development charge methodology does not support the needed level of investment in growth-related infrastructure. Specific references to this will be included in the specific questions below. One area not covered in the questions below pertains to a methodology often referred to as the gross methodology. Of particular issue to Clarington, with a large geographic size and multiple communities that are geographically distant, the legislation should be clearly structured to permit the gross population to be used in determining the allowable funding envelopes for development charges calculations. The notion of capacity being "freed up" in older neighbourhoods in population decline does not apply to a geographically diverse municipality and in effect, creates an additional funding cap for soft services. This is an issue currently under appeal in Clarington. Clarington has used the `gross' population increase in new housing instead of the net population increase to calculate the maximum allowable capital cost. Growth within Clarington is largely focused on three distinct urban areas, which are separated by some considerable distances. The difference in the charge per single dwelling unit between the gross method and the net method is for the soft services is approximately $1,200 per unit. In the same vein, the service level for neighbourhood parks measured at a neighbourhood level is lower for older neighbourhoods than the overall municipal 15-33 average. We simply didn't keep much green space in those days as individual property sizes were typically much larger. As a result, any decline in population only moves that service level for that older neighbourhood closer to what other neighbourhoods enjoy. The DC Act states that when Council expresses a clear intention that excess capacity would be paid for by development charges and is therefore is not uncommitted, this is how Clarington has treated its indoor recreation facilities. The net methodology would force some of this to be uncommitted excess capacity. In that case, how do they get removed from the excess capacity argument if not through some numerical mechanism like an alternative methodology? There are obvious examples such as fire response times and public works that are clearly linked to geography. Purchase of operations vehicles like snow clearing are tied to lane kilometers in order to comply with minimum maintenance standards under the Municipal Act, 2001. That would link to households rather than population because, again, it doesn't matter how many people are in a house it is about the kilometers of roads constructed to accommodate the number of households constructed. Storm water management equipment would also more relate to land area and drainage which results in number of households being a better proxy as population is irrevelant. Also things like snow storage requirements to address salt contamination is more about lane kilometers than people so links to geography. Similarly erosion protection works are triggered by tracts of land being developed and resulting stormwater implications. In answer to this question, the above examples support both the position that the existing methodology does not support the appropriate required level of investment in growth related infrastructure particularly when you consider the interpretation of the existing methodology by the development community and supports the notion of an alternative methodology to the net population methodology. The DC Act should clearly allow for maximum flexibility in Municipal decision making around methodology. 2. Should the Development Charges Act, 1997 more clearly define how municipalities determine the growth-related capital costs recoverable from development charges? For example, should the Act explicitly define what is meant by benefit to existing development? Clarington, for roads and related services, uses a roadside environment methodology, in conjunction with asset maintenance/management plans to determine benefit to existing development. On the soft services side, Clarington generally considers things such as replacement portions to determine this. Specific to this category, there does not need to be specific definitions in the Act. With respect to the general question, costs can generally be relatively easy to establish based upon recent.market costs for each particular service category. ' 15-34 3. Is there enough rigour around the methodology by which municipalities calculate the maximum allowable development charges? Clarington's position on this matter is covered in question #1 as well as the following specific questions. Eligible Services 4. The Development Charges Act, 1997 prevents municipalities from collecting development charges for specific services, such as hospitals and tourism facilities. Is the current list of ineligible services appropriate? The current list of ineligible services is not sufficient as it restricts Council's ability to determine its priorities for the services to be provided. As referenced above, Clarington holds the position that there should be maximum flexibility within the Act for local Councils to set DC's that recover the cost of growth in their municipalities and that respect their local intentions regarding economic development. Elimination of ineligible services would affect Clarington in the areas of park land acquisition, municipal administration buildings, and computers. Particular to Clarington,. expansion to municipal administration buildings is only necessary as a result of space requirements to accommodate growth and will be facing us in the coming years. Land acquisition for parks is also currently funded from tax levy beyond the Planning Act parkland dedication requirements. As Clarington is large geographically and has multiple waterfront communities, there is a significant demand for improved access to the Lake Ontario waterfront. This need cannot be met with current funding capabilities and are not located within new subdivision areas but are being planned to provide services to both the existing and future population. The parkland dedication standards really only address local parks and not community or district parks. 5. The Development Charges Act, 1997, allows municipalities to collect 100% of growth-related capital costs for specific services. All other eligible services are subject to a 10% discount. Should the list of services subject to a 10 % discount be re-examined? The list of services subject to a 10% discount should be re-examined. The Province''s consultation paper specifically notes that "The 10 per cent discount is seen as a way of ensuring that municipalities do not "gold plate" services with development money above . and beyond general municipal standards". The Development Charges Act 1997 15-35 prevents gold plating in that the ten year average service level cap depresses, not inflates, service levels so this issue is already addressed within the legislation. Removing the mandatory 10% discount would have an immediate and lasting impact upon Clarington. As an example, currently our indoor recreation development charges are insufficient to meet debt repayment obligations, made worse because 10% is automatically deducted from eligibility for charge. There is currently a deficit in this development charges reserve fund in excess of $2 million due primarily to poor economic conditions affecting projected growth in new units. An arbitrary discount being applied when service level caps are also applied has a multiplier effect on all discounted services.. If a DC Background Study and By-law is seen to have a "gold plated" service, than this can be appealed to the OMB. 6. Amendments to the Development Charges Act, 1997 provided Toronto and York Region an exemption from the 10 year historical service level. average and the 10% discount for growth-related capital costs for the Toronto-York subway extension. Should the targeted amendments enacted for the Toronto-York Subway Extension be applied to all transit projects in Ontario or only high-order (e.g. subways, light rail) transit projects? Clarington does not have responsibility for transit.- This service category is addressed through the upper tier, The Regional Municipality of Durham. However, Clarington is subject to the provisions of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan). Under the Growth Plan, the Municipality is required: • To have 40% of all residential development occurring annually after 2015 within the build boundary on a regional basis. Clarington's share of Durham's target amounts to 32% annually. • To build a "transit-supportive, pedestrian-friendly environment in designated Greenfield Areas." We can only implement the Growth Plan with transit. In Clarington's case, this does not include subways and light rail. To make the paradym shift in the suburban communities of the GTA, transit cannot be limited to higher order transit and cannot be subject to the 10 year historic service cap. With the general issue of the 10 year historic service level cap, it is Clarington's position that this is too rigourous a methodology. There needs to be a revision to how the service level cap is determined. Currently it is based on the 10 year historic service level. This means that DC's are only paying for capital costs on a historic basis, not on 15-36 the current basis. It also "freezes" service level determinations based on older preferences of the community rather than modernizing the types of services provided. Citizen demands change over time as well as the method of providing some services. The 10 year historic service level cap does not take any of this into account. It also does not provide for new and emerging service levels. The municipality is responsible to provide new service levels to existing citizens but should be able to effectively fund the new service levels for new residents through a development charges mechanism. Reserve Funds 7. Is the requirement to submit a detailed reserve fund statement sufficient to determine how municipalities are spending reserves and whether the funds are being spent on the projects for they were collected? This requirement is sufficient. Clarington provides a quite detailed statement annually that is approved by Council and publicly available through the Municipality's website or upon request. Clarington also includes commitments in this report in order that Council has a clear picture of the status of the reserve funds for future decision making purposes. 8. Should the development charge reserve funds statements be more broadly available to the public, for example, requiring mandatory posting on a municipal website? All reports to Council are automatically available through the Municipality's website. 9. Should the reporting requirements of the reserve funds be more prescriptive, if so, how? See the comments under question #7. Section 37 (Density Bonusing) and Parkland Dedication Questions 10. How can Section 37 and parkland dedication processes be made more transparent and accountable? As referenced in the Province's consultation document, Section 37 allows local municipal councils to authorize increases in the height and density of development beyond the limits set out in their zoning by-law in order for a public benefit in terms of facilities or services provided on or in close proximity to the property being developed, provided that they have enabling official plan policies. The Clarington Official Plan has 15-37 provisions for Section 37 bonusing however, given the economics of building in this part of the GTA, there is no demand for increased densities. Parkland dedication processes are relatively straightforward in Clarington. Where parks are not required, cash-in-lieu of parkland is based on appraisals or recent purchase prices for individual properties. Clarington has a reduced parkland dedication standard for residential development within Town Centres. To date, it has not had any significant impact to incent development. Most of our higher density residential development has occurred outside of Town Centres. Reporting on incentives that reduce a charge or fee is difficult because it is lost revenue rather than additional revenue that can be picked up in financial statements. An additional information schedule to the Municipal Information Returns may be one option in providing a reporting mechanism. 11. How can these tools be used to support the goals and objectives of the Provincial Policy Statement and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe? As mentioned above, Clarington has a reduced parkland dedication standard within Town Centres to promote intensification and vibrant downtown cores. It should be voluntary, not mandatory, to consider reducing standards as it is a decision that needs to be made taking into consideration local circumstances. Voluntary Payments Questions 12. What role do voluntary payments outside of the Development Charges Act, 1997 play in developing complete communities? Voluntary payments should be an acceptable tool if parties are looking to resolve specific concerns or problems. A form of this has occasionally been used in Clarington whereby park development has been undertaken at the developers cost (beyond the local service parks) or some road improvements in circumstances where the developer wants to proceed and is deemed premature. In this case, the existing development charges are committed to developments in the next five year window. This is addressed through draft plans of subdivision. To prohibit municipalities from receiving voluntary payments creates the potential for OMB battles as developers compete for the use of the limited development charge dollars for their projects. We have had experience where developers have received a credit on their development charges for upfronting certain services but this has led to a distortion in municipal infrastructure planning since these funds were not available for 15-38 other projects/developments in progress. This is particularly difficult in a multi-urban area municipality, such as Clarington. 13. Should municipalities have to identify and report on voluntary payments received from developers? In Clarington's case, the transaction is recorded through a donated asset as part of our capital asset reporting through the Financial Information Return. 14. Should voluntary payments be reported in the annual reserve fund statement, which municipalities are required to submit to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing? In circumstances where voluntary payments scenarios are implemented, this is not part of the development charges regime authorized through the DC Background Study and By-law and therefore should be addressed through a separate reporting mechanism. These are authorized by Council and therefore are undertaken through a public reporting process. Growth and Housing Affordability Questions 15. How can the impacts of development charges on housing affordability be mitigated in the future? There are many differences of opinion in this category. Over time, DC's have remained a relatively stable percentage of housing prices (6% to 9% depending upon location). There is a financial impact of not levying DC's on other municipal tax and fee rates charged'to all ratepayers. The DC rates should be left to Municipal Council decision making flexibility in determining appropriate rates and there should be maximum flexibility within the Act for local Councils to set DC's that recover the cost of growth in their municipalities and that respect their local intentions regarding economic development. In Clarington's case, development charges partial and full exemptions are provided for apartment units beginning with the fourth floor. Any units of the sixth floor and above do not pay development charges. In the past four years, since this incentive was implemented, we have not had one project qualify for this. Even for ground-related units, the demand is for the largest of the lot sizes and we have difficulty maintaining a supply of starter homes. 15-39 16. How can development charges better support economic growth and job creation in Ontario? This question seems to be pinning everything on development charges. Municipalities need a tool kit with this being one component of a complete financing plan. Clarington is investing funds outside the DC Act to open capacity for serviced land, but is restricted in how broad it can go based on capital requirement needs under Asset Management planning. A better mechanism to support job creation and economic growth in Ontario should be addressed through stable and predictable funding from upper levels of government. High Density Growth Objectives 17. How can the Development Charges Act, 1997 better support enhanced intensification and densities to meet both local and provincial objectives? The limitation for enhancing intensification and densities stems from the lack of financing capacity by the municipality for the costs of the intensification incentives. If a municipality has to fund the shortfall in DC collections based on the cost of the incentives, the tax base has to be prepared to pick up this cost. Current initiatives around long term asset management strategies will consume financial resources of municipalities without long term stable funding from upper level governments. The Federal Gas Tax funds are a greatly appreciated financial component to asset rehabilitation but is not sufficient to meet the needs. A second limitation is the decisions at the Ontario Municipal Board that are counter to the provincial objectives. This is beyond the scope of the current consultations. 18. How prescriptive should the framework be in mandating tools like area-rating and marginal cost pricing? Again, there should be maximum flexibility within the Act for local Councils to set DC's that recover the cost of growth in their municipalities and that respect their local intentions regarding economic development. Prescribing mandatory area-rating in a municipality with Clarington's size and geographic mix would be very restrictive: It would be very difficult to collect sufficient funds from an area specific basis to proceed with significant projects. Growth within Clarington is largely focused on three distinct urban areas, which are separated by some considerable distances. Services are demanded by residents within each of their respective urban areas, but there is not sufficient growth in each area to proceed independently for larger projects. 15-40 19. What is the best way to offset the development charge incentives related to densities? As Clarington is on the eastern most edge of the Greater Toronto Area, the issue faced with respect.to the densities primarily relates to the lack of market interest. Clarington has a number of incentives within its existing development charges by-law such as credits/exemptions for conversions, exemptions for certain types of industries, and exemptions that escalate for multi-story development within defined intensification areas. The development community has been unable to take advantage of these opportunities due to lack of market interest. Intensification projects are always more costly than Greenfield development. There are costs to land assembly, contamination clean-up, risk of appeals, deficient infrastructure for intensification projects. 15-41 '� � 1 RE POR V FWANCE DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: FND-020-13 File#: Subject: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN — ROADS AND BRIDGES RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND-020-13 be received; 2. THAT the Asset Management Plan for the Municipality of Clarington, Attachment "A"; be adopted as Clarington's Asset Management Plan for Roads and Bridges to comply with the requirements of the Small Rural and Northern Municipal Infrastructure Fund — Capital Program; and 3. THAT a copy of this report, including Attachment "A", be forwarded to the Ministry of Rural Affairs, to comply with the grant application guidelines and to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Municipal Finance Branch. Submitted by: Reviewed by: 0 -a� Nancy T ylor, A,CPA,CA, Franklin Wu, Director of Finance/Treasurer Chief Administrative Officer NT/hji CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 15-42 REPORT NO.: FND-020-13 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 The Small, Rural and Northern Municipal Infrastructure Fund — Capital Program was released in October 2013. It is referred to as Mill — Municipal Infrastructure Investment Initiative. The deadline for submitting an Expression of Interest was November 1, 2013. Clarington submitted an Expression of Interest through Engineering Report EGD-037-13. This is a prescreening process. Municipalities successful through the prescreening process would be advised in late November, early December 2013 by receiving an invitation to submit a full application. Full applications are due in January 2014. 1.2 In order to fulfill the requirements of the MITI, Clarington, through resolution of Council, had to commit to the following: "the municipality has a comprehensive asset management plan that includes all the information and analysis described in Building Together: Guide for Municipal Asset Management Plans in place or will have one in place by December 31, 2013."" The comprehensive AMP must be publicly available, including online, by May 30, 2014. 1.3 The attachment to this report, "The Asset Management Plan for the Municipality of Clarington" is being provided for Council adoption to comply with the Mill funding application rules outlined above. 2. COMMENTS 2.1 Clarington staff in all departments have always worked very proactively with respect to Asset Management, through internal processes as well as five year capital forecasts. Some departments have forecasting and asset replacement/rehabilitation plans for longer time frames and in significant detail, through the use of specialized software. Clarington also has detailed growth management plans through the Development Charges Background Study, as well as a number of Planning Discussion papers covering particular categories, Financial Impact Studies, Master Plans and the Land Acquisition Strategy. 2.2 With respect to capital assets, Finance staff have focused significant effort, firstly on compliance with PSAB for capital asset reporting, on a manual basis to meet compliance deadlines and then conversion to software based processes to streamline capital asset reporting. This has been an extremely complicated process due to the significant extent of asset activity in Clarington (both our own capital programs as well as contributed assets through developer placed capital works), as well as staffing resource issues. 15-43 REPORT NO.: FND-020-13 PAGE 3 2.3 Notwithstanding the significant work and effort in this area, as well as the significant number of studies undertaken, until now Clarington has not had the opportunity to compile all the existing information into a specific Asset Management Plan document. We have focused on Roads and Bridges for the purposes of complying with the MITI application. 2.4 For Council's understanding, the attached AMP is the first version to be adopted by Council. Staff have recently proceeded with an RFP award for Asset Management Plan software to incorporate all capital asset elements. Departments with asset management responsibilities have commenced initial meetings to proceed through the work required to bring a second version to Council in 2014 to 2015. Significant work still remains in this area that will be undertaken in the coming months. 3. CONCURRENCE - Not applicable 4. CONCLUSION It is recommended that Council adopt Attachment "A", "The Asset Management Plan for the Municipality of Clarington" and that this document be included in the full application submission to the Ministry of.Rural Affairs should Clarington be successful in its prescreening application under the MITI funding opportunity. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN - Not Applicable The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development x Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance/Treasurer Attachments: Attachment "A"—Asset Management Plan for the Municipality of Clarington List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Ministry of Rural Affairs, Small, Rural & Northern Municipal Infrastructure Fund-Capital Program Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Municipal Finance Branch 15-44 I I t I I I I 1 I I ASSET M F NT P TMUMWAUTY OF FOR E CLAR �. NGTON I I ' i t �I 1.Y.. I I I i I I 15-4a THEASSETMANAGEMENTPLANFORTHEMUNICIPALITYOFCLARINGTON TC ABLE OF ONTENTS 1.0 ES.............................................................................................................4 XECUTIVE UMMARY 2.0 I.......................................................................................................................6 NTRODUCTION 2.1PAMP.........................................................................6 URPOSE OF THE SSET ANAGEMENT LAN 2.2DAMP.................................................................6 EVELOPMENT OF THE SSET ANAGEMENT LAN 2.3KSAMP..................................................................7 EY ECTIONS OF THE SSET ANAGEMENT LAN 2.3.1CI...............................................................................7 URRENT NFRASTRUCTURE 2.3.2DLS..............................................................................7 ESIRED EVELS OF ERVICE 2.3.3AMS........................................................................7 SSET ANAGEMENT TRATEGY 2.3.4FS.......................................................................................8 INANCIAL TRATEGY 2.4RAMPMP............................8 ELATIONSHIP OF THE SSET ANAGEMENT LAN WITH UNICIPAL LANNING 2.5AMF......................................................................................8 SSET ANAGEMENT RAMEWORK 3.0 SLI............................................................................................10 TATE OF OCAL NFRASTRUCTURE 3.1RN............................................................................................................10 OADS ETWORK 3.1.1W?.....................................................................................10 HAT DO WE OWN 3.1.2W?......................................................................................10 HAT IS IT WORTH 3.1.3W?..............................................................................11 HAT CONDITION IS IT IN 3.1.4W?.....................................................................12 HAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO IT 3.1.5W?.........................................................................12 HEN DO WE NEED TO DO IT 3.1.6H?.................................................................15 OW MUCH FUNDING DO WE NEED 3.1.7H..................................................................17 OW DO WE REACH SUSTAINABILITY 3.1.8R......................................................................................18 ECOMMENDATIONS 3.2BN.........................................................................................................19 RIDGES ETWORK Page 1 3.2.1 WHAT DO WE OWN?......................................................................................19 3.2.2 WHAT IS IT WORTH?.......................................................................................19 3.2.3 WHAT CONDITION IS IT IN?...............................................................................20 3.2.4 WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO IT?......................................................................22 3.2.5 WHEN DO WE NEED TO DO IT?.........................................................................23 3.2.6 HOW MUCH FUNDING DO WE NEED?..................................................................23 3.2.7 HOW DO WE REACH SUSTAINABILITY?.................................................................25 3.2.8 RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................26 4.0 DESIRED LEVELS OF SERVICE..........................................................................................................27 4.1 KEY FACTORS THAT IMPACT LOS.........................................................................................28 4.1.1 ASSET PERFORMANCE.....................................................................................28 4.1.2 STRATEGIC AND CORPORATE GOALS..................................................................28 4.1.3 LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS............................................................................28 4.1.4 COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS.............................................................................28 4.1.5 FUNDING AVAILABILITY....................................................................................28 4.2 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS.........................................................................................29 4.3 ROADS NETWORK LOS.....................................................................................................29 4.4 BRIDGES NETWORK LOS...................................................................................................30 5.0 ASSET MANAGEMENT STRATEGY....................................................................................................32 5.1 OBJECTIVE......................................................................................................................32 5.2 NON-INFRASTRUCTURE SOLUTIONS.....................................................................................32 5.3 LIFE-CYCLE COSTING REVIEW.............................................................................................32 5.4 INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE STRATEGY...........................................................................33 5.5 FUTURE GROWTH.............................................................................................................35 6.0 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY.............................................................................................37 15-47 Page 2 6.1 OBJECTIVE......................................................................................................................37 6.2 THREE YEAR INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT..........................................................................38 6.3 FINANCIAL FUNDING PLAN.................................................................................................39 6.4 RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................43 Page 3 15-48 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Asset Management Plan (AMP) is the first to be compiled for the Municipality of Clarington. It is assembled from multiple sources and studies. It is developed to comply with the requirements of the Municipal Infrastructure Investment Initiative (MIII). This AMP includes all the information and analysis described in Building Together: Guide for Municipal Asset Management Plans. It is critical to keep in mind that while we have used useful life in determining the infrastructure deficit for the purposes of our first iteration of an AMP, plans are already underway to consider condition ratings and class of road in determining priorities and infrastructure deficit conclusions in the next version of Clarington's AMP. Clarington also uses a sophisticated pavement management analytical analysis tool that aids in decision making over where to most effectively use maintenance dollars to extend the life of the road surface. This will also be integrated into the next iteration of the AMP. The estimated replacement value of the Municipality of Clarington's entire road network, in 2013 dollars, is approximately$475.4 million. The cost per household for the road network is$15,163, based on 31,355 households. Approximately 68%of our Roads-Base and 82%of Roads-Surface is in the fair to excellent condition rating, with an overall weighted average of 78%for our entire road network's condition,which is considered fair to excellent. The estimated replacement value of the Municipality of Clarington's entire bridge network, in 2013 dollars, is approximately$71.7 million. The cost per household for the bridge network is$2,288, based on 31,355 households. The bridge inventory in Clarington has, at this point, a better condition record than the roads inventory. 85% is rated fair to excellent. 34%of the Municipality's bridge infrastructure is in good to excellent condition, while less than 15% is in poor or critical condition. For our current purposes, it is recommended that for the Roads component Option#2—50%of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years be utilized in our AMP. At the 101h year (2023), there will be a surplus of$2.5 million. With respect to Bridges, it is recommended that Option#2 —50%of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years be selected. At the 10 year mark (2023)there is a $10.8 million deficit. This is based on a total 3.75%tax levy increase annually and a net effect of an $8.3 million deficit. This deficit can be addressed by selective utilization of debt facilities for several of the more significant projects.This will be refined in our next iteration of the Municipality's AMP that will be based on factors other than the life span of the asset in being the determining factor for replacement. Page 4 ---- -- 15-49 low snfrastrur-ture Repor Card of OaHngoton Asset Categories have been rated based on condition and funding and the overall rating is a blend of the condition and funding. The roads and bridges are then combined for an overall rating for both assets. ASSET OVERALL CONDITION ' FUNDING -s CATEGORY RATING RATING RATING COMMENTS A funding rating of 60%was selected due to accomplishing 50%funding of ROADS 69% 78% 60% the infrastructure deficit over the first 10 years when it is spread over a 15 year time frame. A funding rating of 50%was selected due to not quite accomplishing 50% funding of the infrastructure deficit BRIDGES 67% 85% 50% over the first 10 years when it is spread over a 15 year time frame, prior to the consideration of debt financing. - - —- Page 5 15-50 2 .0 INTRODUCTION The objective of an asset management plan (AMP) is to establish a detailed infrastructure strategy that will be used to manage infrastructure. Over time,this asset management plan will assist in providing a greater quality of infrastructure to those who use it,as well as maintain a consistent level of funding required annually. Included in this version of the AMP will be the current 868 kilometres of centerline roads network,as well as the current 94 bridges included in the municipality's inventories.This current asset management plan is set as a starting point for our municipality's AMP and will continue to evolve for all asset categories in future versions. It is the goal of the Municipality of Clarington to have an asset management plan that monitors all of our tangible capital asset(TCA) categories in the near future. With our municipality's implementation of CityWide's tangible capital asset computer software in the next few months, there will be an in depth overview of all the current TCA categories in preparation for the inclusion of the assets to the asset management plan. This current asset management plan will provide the details of our roads and bridges networks for the next 10 years. Updating will be an ongoing process until a full AMP is up and running for all TCA categories. 2.1 Purpose of the Asset Management Plan This plan will provide a detailed scope of the current infrastructure standing, which includes the number of assets in the inventory, current replacement value of the assets,funding provided annually for infrastructure improvements, the value of funding we require to sustain the current infrastructure and determine if our funding is currently in a surplus or deficit. In the case of a surplus or deficit,we will provide various scenarios that can be undertaken to deal with the surplus or deficit and management and Council can be consulted in order to determine the proper scenario for that specific situation. This process will allow the municipality to provide a reasonable level of service, as well as a predictable annual budget value for infrastructure. This will limit large fluctuations from year to year of the annual capital budget due to the future plans inclusion in the average annual capital investment requirement. This is also a critical component of the Municipality's Strategic Plan, 2011-2014, as it includes an objective entitled "Expand and consolidate asset replacement strategy" and several action items pertaining to this objective. 2.2 Development of the Asset Management Plan This AMP was developed by the Municipality of Clarington's Finance Department. Information regarding the current infrastructure was compiled from the current PSAB 3150 database and was set out to produce an annual replacement cost for each category of asset. The Engineering Department was consulted for infrastructure details regarding condition ratings, infrastructure requirement lists(10 years needs list), and current preventative processes in place. Clarington's finance department provided the financial details required while preparing options for surplus' and shortfalls on the annual capital investment required. In 2014,we will continue to work with a cross departmental team to enhance our asset management Page 6 15-51 plan. We will address all areas of Clarington's assets and incorporate them into a combined asset management and financial strategy for the Municipality of Clarington. We will be assisted by the help of the soon to be implemented CityWide's 'Tangible Assets' and 'Capital Planning &Analysis' software. 2.3 Key Sections of Asset Management Plan There are several key sections that are included in the analysis of each asset category which are listed and discussed below: 2.3.1 Current Infrastructure Identify the current standing of the asset infrastructure by providing the current replacement costs for assets as well as the number of assets included in that category. Provide a condition rating for all assets included in the category and determine the current condition standing of the category as a whole. Show the current value of assets overdue for replacement and the measures to be taken in order to rehabilitate those assets. Determine an annual capital funding requirement by calculating assets to be replaced in the next 10 years. 2.3.2 Desired Level of Service The desired level of service will be determined by comparing current performance measures to previous values from those same measures. In order to determine more exact levels of service, further discussions with management and staff regarding current service levels will assist in the selection of the desired levels of service, as well as ensure that they are achievable levels. One of the action items in the Council approved document "Strategic Plan 2011-2014" is to define and establish service levels by category and function. This more detailed look at service levels will support the next version of Clarington's Asset Management Plan. 2.3.3 Asset Management Strategy This strategy provides a plan of action in order to maintain the desired level of service provided in the above section. Included in this plan will be the assurance that it is providing the most cost effective approach for reaching the desired service level and procedures to minimize risks due to providing these service levels. Providing a ten year requirements list will allow monitoring the work is completed on a priority based level and ensure the work is being completed in a timely fashion. Included in this section will be preparations for future growth and demand increases. This will be based upon current and future Development Charges Background Studies to determine new growth related works that would then have to be factored into subsequent versions of the Asset Management Plan. Prior to establishing the annual Pavement Rehabilitation program Clarington uses it's Pavement Management System (PMS) as a tool to assist with finalizing the annual and forecasted rehabilitation program. Clarington's PMS consists of several integrated components: ---- -- - -- -- Page 7 - ----- 15-52 • Inventory and condition data collection • Data storage and management • Network analysis application The analysis component of the PMS is provided by Deighton's infrastructure management software clTIMS which uses the road network and pavement condition data, along with user defined (specific to Clarington) performance and treatment models, to develop a recommended, multi year, optimized maintenance and rehabilitation program based on provided budgets. Clarington's fundamental goal of our PMS is to find the optimal solution regarding costs, resources,time and returns. The analysis process involves complex decisions at many different levels relating to the factors to be optimized. In other words the PMS is a tool to get information to help answer questions like, "What roads should 1 fix first?"or"How much should 1 be cutting or increasing my road budget to maintain or improve my overall road condition?" It provides staff with enough information to show how to distribute the fixed amount of budget dollars to ensure we are keeping more roads in GOOD to EXCELLENT condition and minimizing those that are in POOR to VERY POOR condition. It guides us with distributing dollars to best improve the condition of the overall network as opposed to looking at individual roads in isolation. This will be a useful tool to use for future iterations of the AMP. 2.3.4 Financial Strategy This section obtains the information created in the above noted sections of the asset management plan and provides funding options for all the required infrastructure needs. Included in the financial strategy will be the current budget provided for infrastructure and ensure that the value is adequate to meet the requirements for infrastructure. In the case that financing does not meet the infrastructure needs this section will provide options available for managing the deficit and allow for the appropriate action to be undertaken. 2.4 Relationship of the Asset Management Plan with Municipal Planning The AMP directly affects the way a municipality budgets for infrastructure items. The AMP provides the required value of annual funding to maintain a desired level of service, which directly can be used in the capital budget to ensure that infrastructure work is fully funded and limiting budget deficits due to infrastructure. In addition to the annual funding, the AMP also provides a plan for work that is required annually for the next 10 years,thus providing a more precise budget figure annually and limiting the calculation at budget preparation time. This also allows for an iterative review of service level decisions into the future. 2.5 Asset Management Framework The asset management plan will provide assistance to multiple areas of the municipality, such 15-53 -- -- Page 8 - — --- as: • Decisions for levels of service being provided and investment decisions • Planning and management of capital assets • Meeting a sustainable service level provided to the public • Meet upper tier government standards and requirements The asset management plan will be an essential document in assisting staff and council to make informed decisions regarding infrastructure investment. As well as providing condition details to ensure the infrastructure can perform the required services, an annual review of the AMP will be beneficial for future versions of the plan, due to the ever changing infrastructure requirements, as well as economic factors. Page 9 15-54 3.0 STATE OF INFRASTRUCTURE 3.1 Road Network Infrastructure 3.1.1 Inventory: What do we own? As shown in the summary table below, the entire network comprises approximately 868 centreline kilometres of road. Road Network Inventory Asset Quantity Quantity Asset Type Component (metres) (km) Rural 597,110 597 Roads Semi-Urban 75,020 75 Urban 196,990 196 869,120 868 The road network data was extracted from Clarington's WorkTech software database and our financial tangible capital asset records. 3.1.2 Inventory: What is it worth? The estimated replacement value of the Municipality of Clarington's entire road network, in 2013 dollars, is approximately$475.4 million. The cost per household for the road network is$15,163, based on 31,355 households. Road Network Replacement Value Asset Replacement Asset Type Component Value in 2013$ Rural 201,485,597 Roads- Base Semi-Urban 32,212,656 Urban 135,981,022 Total for Roads—Base $ 369,679,275 Rural 44,428,435 Roads—Surface Semi-Urban 11,887,129 Urban 49,445,051 Total for Roads—Surface $ 105,760,615 $ 475,439,890 15-55 Page 10 — - 3.1.3 Inventory: What condition is it in? The following charts represent Clarington's road network condition ratings for both the Base and the Surface. Approximately 68% of our Roads-Base and 82%of Roads-Surface is in the fair to excellent condition rating,with an overall weighted average of 78%for our entire road network's condition,which is considered fair to excellent. Loads - Base Condition Roads - surface Bating Condition Rating u CRITICAL i_j POOR FAIR ,j GOOD :EXCELLENT U CRITICAL Li POOR FAIR EA GOOD - EXCELLENT 0.8% 0.2% 17.5% 46.2% j 19.5% #27.9% The above graph depicts results based on the following criteria: PCI(Pavement Condition Condition based on Index)as per WorkTech for Percentage of Remaining AMP Condition Rating Surface(%) Useful Life for Base(yrs) Criteria Excellent 90 to 100 35 to 40 No noticeable defects Good 80 to 89 25 to 34 Minor deterioration Fair 61 to 79 15 to 24 Deterioration evident Poor 31 to 60 10 to 14 Serious deterioration Critical 1 to 30 0 to 9 General or complete failure Currently,there is no legislation for road inspections mandated for municipalities. In Clarington, we perform condition rating inspections of our entire road network every two years. In the Municipal Act 2001,the Ontario Regulation 239/02 introduced the minimum maintenance standards for municipal highways. There are sections covering potholes, shoulder drop-offs, cracks, debris, bridge deck spalls, and roadway surface discontinuities. Decisions around the Asset Management Plan funding strategies must keep in consideration adherence to minimum maintenance standards in order to protect the municipality in the event of lawsuits. — Page 11 15-56 3.1.4 Inventory: What do we need to do to it? There are generally four distinct phases in an asset's life cycle that require specific types of attention and lifecycle activity. These are presented at a high level for the road network below. Further detail is provided in the "Asset Management Strategy" section of this AMP. Currently,there is no legislation for road condition inspections mandated for municipalities. In Clarington, we perform condition rating inspections of our entire road network every two years. In the first quarter of 2014, we expect to have an approved 'Transportation Master Plan' available for circulation. It is anticipated that our current system of inspecting all roads every two years will change to every three years. In the Municipal Act 2001,the Ontario Regulation 239/02 introduced the minimum maintenance standards for municipal highways. As mentioned above,the AMP must keep in consideration adherence to minimum maintenance standards. The minor and major maintenance phases of our roads asset lifecycle activities are included in the provincial minimum maintenance standards in sections; potholes, shoulder drop-offs, cracks, debris, and road surface discontinuities. Addressing Asset Needs ^� Phase Lifecycle Activity Asset Life Stage Minor maintenance Activities such as inspections,monitoring,sweeping,etc. 1St Qtr ® Activities such as repairing pot holes,grinding out roadway Major maintenance rutting,ditching&shoulder maintenance,and patching 2A Qtr sections of road Rehabilitation activities such as asphalt overlays,mill and rd Rehabilitation 3 Qtr paves,etc. Replacement Full road reconstruction 4th Qtr 3.1.5 Inventory: When do we need to do it? At the time of this report, useful life data for each asset class was obtained from the accounting data within Clarington's financial tangible capital asset records. The proposed useful lives are used to determine replacement needs of the individual road segments.We have incorporated the condition ratings and priority rating that was provided from the Engineering departments WorkTech database. Page 12 -- 15-57 Asset Useful life in Years Asset Type Asset Component Useful Life(yrs) Rural—High Float 7 Roads- Base Semi-Urban 40 Urban 40 Rural—High Float Roads—Surface Semi-Urban 20 Urban 20 When we analyze our data and calculate the replacement cost of our roads based on being replaced at the end of their estimated useful life we can determine what our infrastructure deficit is currently. We have a backlog of roads that have exceeded their useful life in the amount of$60.1 million in current dollars. The following chart depicts the future replacement needs for the Municipality of Clarington for the next 35 years and further. The 2013 column represents all the roads infrastructure deficit to date and the following columns are grouped into 5 yr increments. The chart highlights that our infrastructure deficit alone is higher than the next 10 years worth of anticipated road replacements. It is critical to keep in mind that while we have used useful life in determining the infrastructure deficit for the purposes of our first iteration of an AMP, plans are already underway to consider condition ratings and class of road in determining priorities and infrastructure deficit conclusions in the next version of Clarington's AMP. Clarington also uses a sophisticated pavement management analytical analysis tool that aids in decision making over where to most effectively use maintenance dollars to extend the life of the road surface. This will also be integrated into the next iteration of the AMP. Road Network Replacement Cost (in future$} $160,000,000 -- --- - - ------ — -- $140,000,000 --- The Infrastructure deficit --- $120,000,000 - -- for our roads network is $60.1 million $100,000,000 -- ---- —----- — $80,000,000 — - - - - i I $60,000,000 -- $40,000,000 - - -- -- -- $20,000,000 -- — — I 2013 2014 to 2019 to 2024 to 2029 to 2034 to 2039 to 2044 AN D 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 BEYOND Page 13 -- 15-58 When deciding on the priority status of rehabilitation or reconstructing road segments, using the "worst first"approach is contrary to Clarington's pavement management philosophy. Typically, for lost roads, if in an urban environment, we will wait until there are other needs on the street such as storm sewers, sanitary sewers or water main, and reconstruct the road while coordinating with other required improvements. If it is sanitary and water improvements we get the added benefit of some cost sharing with the upper tier municipality, Durham Region, when reconstructing the road. If you undertake the worst roads first we would be taking away dollars that would go farther in rehabilitating roads that are in better condition. A road that has reached 75%of its life has lost 40%of the quality of the road. If you wait for the road for the road to use another 12%of its useful life the road will drop another 40% in the quality of the road. For every$1 dollar you spend at the 75%of the road's useful life to bring it back to a very good condition you will need to spend $4 if you delay the treatment an additional 12%of the road's useful life. This is illustrated in the attached graphic. PAVEMENT LIFE CYCLE:MAINTENANCE COST VS.CONDITION 10 Very Good Each$1.00 of 8 40%Quality Rehabilitation Cost Drop Here... Good 6 -- _------------ _- ------75%of Life-------- ----------___ w Fair 4 40%Qualify Will Cost$4.00 to Drop $5.00 if Delayed Poor to Here 2 ---12%of Life---- Total Very Poor Failure 4 8 12 16 Time(Varies for Each Road Section) Adapted From:American Public Works Association,1983. The Hole Story.,Facts and Fallacies of Potholes Another opportunity we would leverage to deal with the "lost" roads is reconstructing roads in conjunction with development needs in which these roads have been identified in our Development Charge By-Law. Other opportunities to address the lost roads are when there are additional funding programs offered by the Provincial and/or Federal governments. Our last course of action would be to budget the reconstruction as either a separate budget item through tax levy increases or as a last resort fund all or part of the reconstruction through our annual pavement rehabilitation funding. Page 14 -- --- 15-59 3.1.6 Now much funding do we need? The table below illustrates what Clarington has historically, on average, allocated annually for capital investment in our roads network. Budget Capital Total Capital 5 year Average Year Investment Investment Annual Capital $ over 5 yrs Investment 2012 $5,038,866 -- --- 2011 $7,876,600 2010 $5,838,800 $29,355,154 $5,871,031 2009 $5,290,000 2008 $5,310,888 To further illustrate the financial impact of the roads infrastructure deficit for the Municipality of Clarington, we have expanded on the previous chart to show the annual replacement cost by year for the next 10 years using three scenarios below. The blue columns represent the annual replacement required based on the roads useful life, and the red columns represent the options for handling the infrastructure deficit of$60.1 million for our roads. The chart clearly shows that our average annual capital investment in our roads of$5.9 million is not going to cover the backlog but only increase the deficit over time. Several alternative scenarios have been developed as part of this review. The first scenario reflects the infrastructure deficit of$60.1 million being spread over 10 years. The alternative scenarios involve only 50%of the infrastructure deficit spread over 15 years, and 25%of the total $60.1 million deficit to be spread over 15 years. These scenarios will be addressed in the Financial Management Strategy section of the AMP. Option 1: Spread 100%of the infrastructure deficit evenly over the next 10 years Road Network Replacement Cost by Year $25,000,000 5 year average of annual capital -- -- $20,000,000 investment for clarington's road network is currently$5.9 million $15,000,000 ---- - - $10,000,000 ---- - -- - - $5,000,000 - - — - - $- - 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ■Annual Replacement Costs n 100%Infrastructure Deficit spread over 10 years Page 15 15-60 Option 2: Spread 50%of the infrastructure deficit evenly over the next 15 years Road Network Replacement Cost by Year $20,000,000 - -- - — -- —.-- i 5 year average of annual capital $15,000,000 r investment for Clarington's road - network is currently$5.9 million $10,000,000 -- --- - -- $5,000,000 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 202.1 2022 2023 i-j Annua)Replacement Costs U 50%of InfrastructLlre Deficit spread over 15 years Option 3: Spread 25%of the infrastructure deficit evenly over the next 15 years Road Network Replacement Cost by Year $35,000,000 $30,000,000 - — - $25,000,000 - - i $20,000,000 --- -- - - $15,000,000 $10,000,000 - -- - - - --- -- ----- -- -- $5,000,000 - $ W4 T 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 u Annual Replacement Costs 1125% Infl'dStrUChlre Deficit spread over 15 years The analysis completed to determine capital revenue requirements was based on the following constraints and assumptions: ➢ Replacement costs are based on the 2013 current value plus an annual inflation rate of 2%to make replacement costs more realistic at the time of replacement. ➢ The timing for individual road segment replacement was defined by the replacement year as described in the previous section 1.5 Inventory: What is the useful life. 15-61– — Page 16 - ➢ The analysis was run for a 40 year period to ensure all assets have cycled through at least one iteration of its lifecycle, therefore providing a sustainable projection. ➢ All assets that are overdue for replacement have been divided and added to the next 10 years of replacements, in order to bring those up to standards. Two other scenarios are provided. 3.1.7 How do we reach sustainability? Road Network Replacement 40yr Forecast (by4yr increments) $120,000000 — =-- - - -- - — $110,000,000 4 year average annual capital requirement to reach $100,000,000 — sustainability for Clarington's road --- -- — — $90 000 000 i network is$67.6 million $30,000,000 -- -- — --- --- $70,000,000 - ----- —= --------- -- $60000,000 - $50,000,000 II------ - --- -- --- — --- $40,000,000 - - - - -- $30,000,000 - -- $20,000,000 $10,000,000 - — -- $ - -T- 2014- 2018- 2022- 2026- 2030- 2034- 2033- 2042- 2046- 2050- 2017 2021 2025 2029 2033 2037 2041 2045 2049 2053 ❑Replacement Costs 11 Infrastructure Deficit The chart is segmented into 4 year increments to ensure that we capture the maximum 40 year useful life of our roads. It's important to note that these figures don't include any new roads that are added to our network in the next 40 years. The calculation to determine the average annual investment into Clarington's roads is as follows; Total Replacement Cost of all roads for the next 40 years ($676,024,194) 40 years _$ 16,900,605 per year or$67,602,419 for a 4yr period Based on the above assumptions and calculations,the average annual investment into Clarington's -- Page 17 15-62 roads network is$16.9 million and our current average'annual investment is$5.1 million. Clarington is operating at an annual deficit of$11.8 million compared to the optimal level to reach our financial sustainability. 3.1.8 Recommendations ➢ The implementation of TCA software 'CityWide' (scheduled to be implemented within the next 3 months) will assist greatly in the Asset Management Plan process and continuously in the future of infrastructure. The more fulsome AMP exercise bringing in all municipal assets will be undertaken within the next year with an updated AMP coming forward to Council in early 2015. This will be an organization wide initiative incorporating a team of staff from all departments with asset maintenance/management responsibilities. This team has met several times already in working through the full request for proposal process for budgeted software acquisition and are now moving on to the implementation stage. ➢ The Operations Department, along with the report on 'Rural Roads Initiative' indicates that 37% of our rural roads have not received any preventative maintenance in the last 15 years. Our current budget allows for funds to be allocated to the rural roads preventative program to fund 241<m per year, and that is recommended to be increased to at least 40km per year(an annual budget increase of approximately$3 million). ➢ The Municipality should strive to eliminate the road network infrastructure deficit of$60.1 million over the next 15 plus years. ➢ A more complex condition assessment program should be established as part of the next iteration of the AMP to incorporate the PCI, asset age, performance, risk analysis and priority assessment across all assets. This will be an evolution to the next level of complexity, by moving away from an assessment based on lifespan of an asset only. Many assets will over or underperform and this will be taken into consideration along with the usage of the asset. For roads,this would bring in the class of the road in order to establish priority needs. This may dramatically shift the infrastructure deficit calculations. ➢ The Infrastructure Report Card should be updated annually. ------ ----- -- - 15-63 — Page 18 - 3.2 Bridges Network Infrastructure 3.2.1 Inventory: What do we own? As shown in the summary table below, the entire network comprises approximately 94 Roadway Bridges. Bridges Network Inventory Asset Type Asset Component Quantity C-Cast In Place 77 P- Precast Concrete 9 Bridges S-Steel 3 T-Timber/Wood 2 Multi-Span 2 94 The Bridges network data was extracted from the Clarington WorkTech software database and financial tangible capital asset records. 3.2.2 Inventory: What is it worth? The estimated replacement value of.the Municipality of Clarington's entire bridge network, in 2013 dollars, is approximately$71.7 million. The cost per household for the bridge network is $2,288, based on 31,355 households. Bridges Network Replacement Value Replacement Cost in Asset Type Asset Component 2013$ Cast In Place $ 43,763,215 Precast Concrete $ 19,094,151 Bridges Steel $ 1,506,156 Timber/Wood $ 895,795 Multi-Span $ 6,487,764 $ 71,747,081 Page 19 15-64 Bridge Inventory - BY Type Timber/Wood Multi-Span 1.25% 9,04% Steel;2.10% Precast Concrete 26.61% Castln Place 6.1.00% ■Cast In Place u Precast Concrete Steel ■Tim ber/Woad rf Multi-Span 3.2.3- Inventory: What condition is it in? The bridge inventory in Clarington has, at this point, a better condition record than the roads inventory. 85% is rated fair to excellent. 34%of the Municipality's bridge infrastructure is in good to excellent condition, while less than 15% is in poor or critical condition. AECOM, our engineering consultants provides a detailed listing of our bridges, as well as a Bridge Condition Index(BCI). This index is a weighted calculation of the total condition of each bridge in our inventory,taking in to consideration physical condition,value, performance deficiencies, improvement costs,traffic, etc. The BCI provides a rating between 0 (lowest possible score)to 100 (highest possible score)for an overall condition rating of each bridge, which is used to provide a current condition of each bridge. AMP Condition Rating BCI (Bridge Condition Rating) Excellent 90 to 100 No noticeable defects Good 80 to 89 Minor deterioration Fair 61 to 79 Deterioration evident Poor 31 to 60 Serious deterioration Critical 1 to 30 General or complete failure 15-65 Page 20 — -- — Bridges Condition by Quantity Excellent Good Fair Poor Critical 3.3.4 Inventory: What dm we need to do to it? Phase Lifecycle Activity Asset Life Stage Act��iessuch asinopecdoh� mon�ohng sweeping,Minor Maintenance "" 1st Qtr control, etc. Act��essuch osnepaioto cracked orspaUedoonorete' damaged Major Maintenance 2nd Qtr expansion joints, bent or damaged railings, etc. rehabilitation events such as reinforcement ofstructural Rehabilitation 3rd Qtr elements,deck replacement, etc. Replacement Full structure reconstruction 4th Qtr ' Inspections are completed for all structures that span 3 metres ormore. Structure inspections for the municipality are performed byAECOW1. Inspections are completed onabi-onnua| basis (once every two years). Included in the inspection must be structure type, number of spans, span lengths, other key attribute data, detailed photo images, &structure element by element inspection, rating& recommendations for repair, rehabilitation, & replacement. The records of these are forwarded tothe Municipality's Infrastructure Manager, as a PDF file for record retention. ---- Page 21 1 �—�� 3.3.5 Inventory: When do we need to do it? For the purpose of this report, useful life data for each asset structure was obtained from the accounting data within the Municipality's tangible capital asset records. This proposed useful life is used to determine replacement needs of individual assets,which will be used to assist in calculations for the overall financial requirements. Asset Useful Life in Years Asset Type Asset Component Useful Life Cast In Place 50 Precast Concrete 45 Bridges Steel 40 Timber/Wood 50 Multi-Span 75 As field condition information becomes available in time, data should be updated in the system in order to have an increasingly more accurate picture of current asset age&future replacement requirements. The following table provides the current projections of structure replacements based on the age of the asset only. As mentioned for Roads,the future iterations of the AMP will include conditions beyond simply the age of the asset in assessing replacement requirements. Bridge Network Replacement Cast (in future $) $40,000,000 ---—--- - --------------- - ------------ -- -.. - --- -- -- ---- $35,000,000 - --------- -- ------ -- ------------- — -- ------- -- - $30,000,000 - The Infrastructure ---- ------- -- ---------------------- deficit for our Bridges is $25,000,000 $18.2 million ------_---� - -- $20,000,000 ------- --- ---- --- ----- $15,000,000 -- -- - - ---— -- $10,000,000 -- - ----- - - - --- $5,000,000 -- --- 2013 2014 to 2019 to 2024 to 2029 to 2034 to 2039 to 2044 ind 2018 2023 2028 2033 2033 2043 Beyond --- 15-67 Page 22 -- 3.3.6 Inventory: How much funding do we need? The table below, illustrates what Clarington has histroically, on average, allocating annually for capital investment of our bridges. Capital Total Capital 5 year Weighted Budget Investment Investment over 5 Average Annual Year $ yrs Capital Investment 2012 $970,000 - 2011 $801,000 2010 $600,000 $3,132,000 $624,600 2009 $650,000 2008 $102,000 To further illustrate the financial impact of the bridges infrastructure deficit for the Municipality of Clarington,we have expanded on the previous chart to show the annual replacement cost by year for the next 10 years. The blue columns represent the annual replacement required based on the roads useful life, and the red columns represent the options for handling the infrastructure deficit of$18.2 million for our bridges. The chart clearly shows that our average annual capital investment in our bridges of$625 thousand is not going to cover the backlog but only increase the deficit over time. Several alternative scenarios have been developed as part of this review. The first scenario reflects the infrastructure deficit of$18.2 million being spread over 10 years. The alternative scenarios involve only 50%of the infrastructure deficit spread over 15 years or the total $60.1 million deficit to be spread over 15 years. These scenarios will be addressed in the Financial Management Strategy section of the AMP. Option 1: Spread 100%of the infrastructure deficit evenly over the next 10 years Bridge Network Replacment Cost per Year $16,000,000 -- ----- ------ ------- ---------- $14,000,000 -- --- ------ ---------- j 5 year average of annual capital $12,000,000 invest ment for clarington's -"- -- — - -- $10,000,000 .I bridge network is currently$625 — — -- --------- $8,000,000 - thousand $6,000,000 I --- $4,000,000 - -- - $2,0001000 --- -- 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Li/annual Replacement Costs UJ 100%l11fr0st1-UCtUre Deficit Spread over 10 years Page 23 15-68 Option 2: Spread 50%of the infrastructure deficit evenly over the next 15 years Bridge Network Replacement Cost per Year 16,000,000 - -- --- - - --- - - 14,000,000 --- --- _ 12,000,000 -I 5 year average of annual capital - ----"-- - ---- ---- 10,000,000 - investment for Clarington's bridge network is currently$625 thousand 3,000,000 -- ---- ----- - 6,000,000 - — - -- - I 4,000,000 - -- ---- --- -_.T 2,000,000 - ----- -- ...- - - — - -- — 2013 2014 2015 2016 201.7 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Annual Replacement Costs I Infrastructure Deficit 50%Spread over 15 years Option 3: Spread 100%of the infrastructure deficit evenly over the next 15 years Bridge Network Replacment Cost per Year $16,000,000 --- --- $14,000,000 --- — $12,000,000 5 year average of annual capital $10,000.000 _ investment for Clarington's bridge network is currently$625 thousand $8,000,000 $6,000,000 - - -- -- - --- $4,000,000 - - - -- $2,000,000 -- --- - -- - -- - - --- 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 o Annual Replacement Costs 17 100%Infrastructure Deficit Spread over 15 years The analysis completed to determine capital 'revenue requirements was based on the following constraints and assumptions: ➢ Replacement costs are based on the 2013 current value plus an annual inflation rate of 2%to make replacement costs more realistic at the time of replacement. ➢ The timing for individual structure replacement was defined by the replacement year as described in the previous section 3.3.5 Inventory: What is the useful life. ➢ The analysis was run for a 70 year period to ensure all assets cycled through at least one replacement, therefore providing a sustainable projection. 15-69 — -- Page 24 ➢ All assets that are overdue for replacement have been divided &added to the next 10 years of replacements, in order to bring those up to standards. Alternative scenarios are also provided for allocation over the next 15 years, and allocation of only 50%of the replacements over the next 15 years. These will be addressed in the Financial Management Strategy section of this AMP 3.3.7 Inventory: How do we reach sustainability? Sustainable Capital Requirements -- 70 Year Forecast $00,000,000 ---- - --- --- - --- - -- -- - $80,000,000 - -- -- 570,000,000 $60,000,000 --- -- -- - ----- 5year average Annual Capital - - -- — - Requirement to reach 50,000,000 sustainability for Clarington's - - - ---- -- - —--- $40,000,000 ---- Bridges Network is$18.07 million - $30,000,000 -- -- -- 520,000,000 -- ---- — - -- -- $10,000,000 I $a ---- r` —i— - r- -r�-- -� 2013- 2018- 2023- 2028- 2033- 2038- 2043- 2048- 2053- 2058- 2063- 2068- 2073- 2073- 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 2042 2047 2052 2057 2062 2067 2072 2077 2082 [-,C-Cast In Place LIP-PrecastConcrete S-Steel 1.3T-Timber/Wood 1M-MUlLi-Span Based on the previous discussed assumptions,the average annual revenue required to sustain the Municipality of Clarington's bridge structures is$3,614,000.The chart is segmented into 5 year increments to ensure that we capture the maximum 70 year useful life. It's important to note that these figures don't include any new bridges that are added to our inventory over the next 70 years. Based on Clarington's current average annual funding of$625 thousand, there is an annual deficit of$2,989,000. The calculation to determine the average annual investment into Clarington's bridges is as follows: Total Replacement Cost of all bridges for the next 70 years ($252,963,810) 70 years _ $ 3,613,768 per year or$18,068,840 for a Syr period in conclusion, based on the age data only, there are a noticeable percentage of bridges in fair, poor, & Page 25 15-70 critical condition. There are significant needs to be addressed within the next 10 years totaling approximately$55,500,000. This also includes 35 bridges (valued at$20,293,759)that have surpassed their useful life expectancy& have not been replaced or rehabilitated. When we compared the Bridges Needs report, prepared by Aecom, and the replacement needs calculated based on age only we have concluded that the following bridges need major rehabilitation within the next 2 years; Structure Road Name 2013 Estimated ID Replacement Rehab Cost Cost 98025 Reid Rd $ 945,176 $ 219,000 98037 Elliott Rd $ 453,157 $ 264,000 98083 Conc. Rd 5 $ 287,891 $ 196,000 TOTAL $ 1,686,224 $679,000 3.3.8 Recommendations ➢ The implementation of TCA software 'CityWide' (scheduled to be implemented within the next 3 months) will assist greatly in the Asset Management Plan process and continuously in the future of infrastructure. ➢ Several bridges have been fully amortized and included in our backlogged amount to be replaced and are currently in "Good" working condition as per our BCI. The lifespan of these bridges require adjusting to allocate a more true replacement date. ➢ Additional funding will be required if we are looking to maintain or improve the current bridge infrastructure. ➢ An appropriate%of asset replacement value should be used for operations and maintenance activities on an annual basis. This should be determined through a detailed analysis of Operating and Maintenance activities and added to future AMP reporting. ➢ The Infrastructure Report Card should be updated on an annual basis. - Page 26 ---- 15-71 4.0 DESIRED LEVELS OF SERVICE There is an ever increasing expectation for Municipality's to make decisions about the services they provide to their citizens with a much greater level of empirical data to support those decisions. In analyzing desired level of services within the Municipality, Council, senior management and other decision makers will have the information needed to monitor, review and improve services to its citizens. Although many informal service levels currently exist within the Municipality of Clarington there needs to be a formal review and analysis conducted. A community's infrastructure provides the foundation for its economic development and a well maintained infrastructure is essential for the delivery of critical core services for the citizens of the Municipality of Clarington.This is a critical component of the Municipality's Strategic Plan, 2011-2014. The strategic plan refers both to defining and establishing service levels by category and function as well as expanding and consolidating our asset replacement strategy. The Municipality's Roads and Bridges and their Desired Service Levels are currently being reviewed. The goal is to manage these assets at their lowest overall life cycle cost which will allow the Municipality of Clarington to enhance the existing financial reporting and planning efforts into a longer term and formal Financial Strategy. Desired levels of service (LOS) are indicators, comprising of many factors, which establish defined quality thresholds at which municipal services should be provided to the community. They support the organization's strategic goals and are based on customer expectations, statutory requirements, standards, and the financial capacity of the municipality to deliver those levels of service. Levels of Service are used to provide measurements of the municipality's efficiency on specific infrastructure to both customers and staff. Providing customers with the offered and proposed level of service is a major objective for LOS. On a corporate level, determining the benefits of having a service along with the associated costs will assist Council and staff to determine the feasibility of providing the current level of service and in making future service level decisions. Taking the key factors of providing a service into consideration is an important part of creating a desired level of service. It is also important to view some performance measures over a full fiscal period, in order to determine the current level of service that is being provided, and once there is a better understanding,to determine if the level of service is adequate or needs to be increased. Page 27 -- 15-72 4.1 Key Factors that impact level of service: 4.1.1 Asset Performance The performance of an asset takes into consideration the current condition of the asset and its ability to meets its legislative requirements; as well as, ensuring that an asset provides that service in a safe manner within its capacity requirements. The entire lifecycle costs associated with an asset(design, maintenance, rehabilitation or replacement) are all critical factors that affect the level of service to which the Municipality of Clarington can provide. 4.1.2 Strategic and Corporate Goals Clarington's strategic plan provides the municipality with the direction which we intend to strive for in the future, how we plan to get to that benchmark, as well as assist in decisions for resource allocation, while ensuring strategic priorities are followed.The plan helps identify priorities and give guidance for current and future spending of municipal tax dollars and revenues. The level of importance that a community's vision is dependent on infrastructure, will ultimately affect the level of service provided or those levels that it attempts to deliver. The strategic plan references both the need for a service level program and an expanded, consolidated asset replacement strategy. 4.1.3 Legislative Requirements Infrastructure levels of service are directly influenced by many legislative and regulatory requirements. Within this AMP focusing on Clarington's roads and bridges, we must adhere to the Minimum Maintenance Standards for municipal highways that keep levels of service above a specific standard in order to ensure protection from ever increasing municipal liability awards by the courts. 4.1.4 Community Expectations Levels of service are directly related to public expectations regarding how tax dollars are utilized. The public can provide an opinion in determining when items are required to be rehabilitated or replaced. Due to the ever increasing cost of infrastructure, it is essential that the public be included in the decision making process of the service levels and educate them on the associated costs to provide that level of service. There has been a sequence of public meetings with respect to the ongoing work on the Transportation Master Plan, which will be an important linkage in the next version of Clarington's AMP. 4.1.5 Funding Availability The availability of finances will ultimately control all items of a desired level of service. In an idealistic scenario,the funds available would be able to achieve corporate goals, meet all legislative requirements, fund all required assets life cycle needs, as well as meet the needs of the community. There are also the non-eligible components of the growth related capital 15-73 -- Page 28 projects that are a draw upon the financial resources that would otherwise be devoted to the priorities noted above. Levels of service will be dictated by the availability of funds,the ability to increase funds, and the community's willingness to pay. 4.2 Key Performance Indicators Performance measures that track levels of'services should be specific, measureable, achievable, relevant, and time restricted. Measures that the Municipality reports annually for roads and bridges are listed below: • Operating cost for paved roads per lane km • Total cost for paved roads per lane km • Operating cost for gravel roads per lane km • Total cost for gravel roads per lane km • Operating cost for bridge/culvert structures per square metre • Total cost for bridge/culvert structures per square metre These indicators provide a breakdown of the maintenance or day-to-day costs to allow an asset to continue to perform at the current level and prevent premature aging. In the case of the municipality wanting to increase the level of service of one of these assets, the measures above would have to increase. The availability or reallocation of resources (mainly finances)would determine if the level of service increase of an asset is achievable. • Percent of paved road lane km where the condition is rated Good or Very Good • Number of bridge/culvert structures where the condition is rated Good or Very Good These additional performance measures provide the current status of the municipality's roads and bridges and show the amount of assets that are in good working condition. This information helps to decide if additional funding is required in order to have a higher percentage of roads or bridges in good or very good working condition. As mentioned in several sections above,this work will be further enhanced in the coming year,to provide an even greater level of support to more defined decision making around asset replacement. 4.3 Roads Network LOS The municipality of Clarington roads inventory consists of 868 centreline km of roads. Which includes 597 km's in rural areas, 75 km's in semi-urban areas, and 196 km's in urban areas. The main service that is provided by this infrastructure item is access to residential, commercial, and industrial properties and other community amenities for people, goods, and services. Various minimum road standards are provided by upper tier governments that the municipality must follow in regards to road maintenance, road conditions, and winter condition maintenance. Page 29 -- 15-74 Roads Performance Measure 2012 2011 2010 Operating Cost for paved roads per lane km $874.16 $704.70 $923.98 Total Cost for paved roads per lane km $3,869.54 $3,716.14 $3,763.83 Operating Cost for unpaved roads per lane km $2,066.10 $2,348.32 $1,859.41 Total Cost for unpaved roads per lane km $16,600.29 $15,980.19 $15,717.83 of paved roads with Good to Very Good 57% 57% 59% Condition rating Operating Cost for winter maintenance of $980'28 $1,423.78 $845.99 roads per lane km maintained in the winter Total Cost for winter maintenance of roads per $1,217.71 $1,652.93 $1,096.96 lane km maintained in the winter The municipality has been able to maintain a consistent level of roads in good condition. One concern here is that as Clarington is a relatively high growth municipality, new roads are being added on at the very good condition rating and this somewhat masks the overall condition rating. A goal to increase the percentage of roads in good condition or better to 65%seems reasonable. 4.4 Bridges Network LOS The municipality's bridge inventory consists of 94 bridges that are equal to or greater than three metres. The main service that our bridges provide is similar to our roads section. The main service provided by our bridges is access to and from residential, commercial, industrial properties, as well as access to other community locations for people, goods, and services. Our bridges receive a detailed visual inspection on a bi-annual basis, performed by a licensed engineer from AECOM. Any minor repairs or maintenance are funded by the operating budget. Any major maintenance items (example/damaged railings or expansion joints, cracked concrete, etc) are funded out of the yearly budget amount for structure rehabilitation. AECOM provides a detailed listing of our bridges, as well as a Bridge Condition Index (BCI) which has been transferred into our WorkTech database. This index is a weighted calculation of the total condition of each bridge in our inventory,taking in to consideration physical condition, value, performance deficiencies, improvement costs,traffic, etc. The BCI provides a rating between 0 (lowest possible score)to 100(highest possible score)for an overall condition rating of each bridge, which is used to provide a current condition of the bridges. Bridge Condition Index for Clarington #of Average Condition Bridge Class Bridges BCI BCI Range Class Cast In Place 77 73.66 100.00-39.32 Fair Precast Concrete 10 79.83 95.87-58.37 Fair Timber/Wood 2 89.53 92.28-86.79 Good Steel 3 49.58 55.31-44.01 Poor Multi-Span 2 .81.01 85.80-76.22 Good Page 30 15-75 Bridges Performance Measure 2012 2011 2010 2009 Operating Cost for bridges and culverts per square $12.74 $8.04 $4.82 $8.16 metre of service area Total Cost for bridges and culverts per square metre $46.17 $39.74 $38.40 of service area of Bridges/culverts with Good to Very Good 75% 75% 79% 79% Condition rating The municipality's average operating cost for bridges and culverts have increase substantially in the past two years. The increase is partially due in part to some major rehabilitation that was completed to some of the larger bridges within the municipality(Example- Bowmanvi)le Creek Bridge). The increase would also be caused by some other factors that will continue to cause the annual operating cost to increase in future years as well;such as, maintaining the current bridge condition rating with our aging bridges, rehabilitations, and replacements. If funding is maintained at the current level without any increase,�eventually the bridges will begin to deteriorate and the condition ratings would decline. Another cause for additional funding is the constant increasing constructions costs of infrastructure work to be completed. The municipality has continued to maintain a reasonable condition rating of bridges. There was a small decline from 2010 to 2011, due in most part to the decrease of operating costs in 2010, which was lowered due to the economic downturn in recent years. If the municipality plans to continue or improve the current state of bridge conditions, they will have to be prepared for increases in costs. Page 31 15-76 5 ® 0 ASSET MANAGEMENT STRATEGY 5.1 Objective The main objective of a proper asset management strategy is to provide a plan of action to maintain desired levels of service, minimize the associated risks with implementing services, while providing the best cost effective measures. In order to assist in the implementation of an asset management plan,the current processes in place for maintaining, repairing and rehabilitating infrastructure provide a strong base for the asset management strategy. This section of the Asset Management Plan will provide the measures and practices that are currently in place and those that will be used in the future to continually maintain and improve our current asset conditions, provide accurate asset valuations, extend the assets useful life, and maintain levels of service. 5.2 Non-Infrastructure Solutions The Municipality of Clarington has completed the procurement process for selecting new asset management software (CityWide)which will be implemented within the next 3 months. Citywide software will help our municipality to develop a set of direct and indirect infrastructure actions and life- cycle interventions based on best practices within the industry. This will be implemented with a cross departmental team and extended to all municipal assets. Clarington's engineering department will have a completed `Transportation Master Plan' by early 2014. The purpose of this plan is to develop policies and strategies for the transportation network which includes the entire road and bridges network up to the year 2031. Our goal is to link the asset management plan to both the strategic plan and the official plan. We plan on utilizing departmental master plans and land acquisition studies as well as incorporating new growth related assets through our Development Charges Background Study. We will continue with all our condition rating assessments and incorporate the results into our new asset management software. We will also be looking to integrate decisions generated through our elaborate pavement management software solution. 5.3 Life-cycle Costing Review The municipality of Clarington assumes that an asset will be replaced at the end of its useful life. Based on the age and expected useful life,the graph below illustrates the cost of roads and bridges that will be due for replacement. It is expected that$7.9 million worth of roads and bridges should be replaced in - 15®77 Page 32 - - ---- 2014 and then almost double to $14.2 million by 2017. It is important to note that implementation of more robust rehabilitation and preventative maintenance strategies will serve to ensure that assets are able to be used to the end of their estimated useful life. As referenced several times throughout the AMP, the use of useful life only has some limitations so this will be revised and broadened to incorporate other decision factors such as detailed condition ratings and road classification in the next version of our AMP. 10 year Life-Cycle Replacement of Roads Bridges $25,000,000 - $20,000,000 — - - --- ---- $15,000,000 — - $10,000,000 i--_ -- - -- - -----_�_- $5,000,000 - - --- 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 u Roads ©Bridges 5.4 Inspection and Maintenance Strategy Roads The municipality of Clarington's engineering and operations departments have a preventative maintenance program in place in order to maintain the current level of service and life expectancy of our roads networks. A crack sealing program has been adopted in order to maintain roadways through their useful life expectancy. This process is beneficial because it protects the road from moisture.from entering into the cracks and limits the deterioration of the pavement. The municipality completes approximately 20 to 30 kilometres of road crack sealing annually. As part of this maintenance program, newly formed roads are regularly sealed after seven years of use,where older roadways that have been rehabilitated are inspected and crack sealed every three years. Other processes that are part of a proactive approach to maintaining roadways that the municipality uses are ditching and shouldering. Both of these practices have not been performed on all of Clarington's roads, but have been completed on a large percentage of them and this provides better drainage for the roadway, therefore, limits the water that can pool and freeze on the road. Clarington, through its annual operating budget allocates$1.8 million for its road maintenance program that includes ditch/shoulder maintenance, pavement resurfacing, pavement patching, surface treatment, gravel patching and resurfacing, dragging and grading of rural roads. The municipality of Clarington performs road inspections of our entire road network on a bi-annual basis Page 33 15-78 to calculate the 'Pavement Condition Index' rating or PCI. The PCI is a numerical indicator (1 to 100) that rates the surface condition of the pavement. The PCI provides a measure of the present condition of the pavement based on the distress observed on the surface of the pavement,which also indicates structural integrity and surface operational condition. It provides an objective and rational basis for determining maintenance and repair needs and priorities. Continuous monitoring of the PCI is used to establish the rate of pavement deterioration, which permits early identification of major rehabilitation needs. The PCI provides feedback on pavement performance for validation or improvement of current pavement design and maintenance procedures. Condition Activities Required BCI Rating Excellent Inspections and monitoring 90- 100 Good Minor Maintenance—sweeping, roadside 80-89 maintenance Major Maintenance—crack sealing, repairing pot Fair holes, grinding out roadway rutting, small 61 -79 patching Poor Rehabilitation -asphalt overlays, mill and paves 31-60 Critical Full road reconstruction 0-30 The above chart provides the condition category of a road segment with regards to the Pavement Condition Index and the approximate activities that will be undertaken in the current condition state. Throughout the life of each road segment,these activities are to be completed in order to maintain or extend the current useful life of the road. Bridges All of Clarington's bridges are inspected by AECOM every other year. After completing the inspection, AECOM provides a summary report to the municipality which contains details pertaining to bridges that require regular maintenance (cracked concrete, bent railings, etc), and those that require rehabilitation (structure elements, deck replacement) and bridges that require full replacement. In addition to the summary report,AECOM provides a detailed report that states any bridges that require any future Engineering investigations;such as, deck surveys. Clarington, through its annual budget allocates $22,500 towards bridge maintenance. In order to assist in asset management of our bridge inventory,AECOM provides a 10 year structures forecast. This forecast provides structure repairs, rehabilitations, and replacements that will be required to be completed within the next 10 year period. The forecast specifies the year when the work will be required, provides an estimated cost for the required work on each structure, as well as a yearly total cost for all structures within the given year. This 10 year requirement list provides assistance for the municipality from a budgeting perspective. Providing the repairs and rehabilitations required will 15-79 Page 34 allow the finance staff to ensure that funding is available for the fiscal period when the work is due to be completed for each bridge. Since this work dictates when costs will be required,this allows the municipality to budget for these costs over multiple years, in turn providing additional flexibility on the annual budget. The inclusion of our Bridge Condition Index (BCI) into the asset management plan provides a more realistic current overall condition rating of each bridge. Engineering compiles several weighted factors (Superstructure,wearing surface, expansion joints,deck, substructure, and railings) in the completion of the BCI calculation. The BCI calculation provides a value for each bridge between one (1) and one hundred (100) that is determining the overall current condition of the bridge. The higher BCI rating represents the bridge is in better condition, the lower BCI ratings determines the bridge is evident to require rehabilitation within the near future. Condition Activities Required BCI Rating Maintenance (Sweeping and Winter Excellent 90- 100 Maintenance) Good Maintenance (Sweeping and Winter 80-89 Maintenance, slight wearing visible) Major Maintenance (Cracked concrete, damaged Fair 61 -79 expansion joints) Poor Rehabilitation (Deck replacement,Structural 31-60 elements reinforcements) Critical Full reconstruction of Bridge 0-30 The above chart provides the condition category of a bridge with regards to the Bridge Condition Index and the approximate activities that will be undertaken in the current condition state. Throughout the life of each bridge,these activities are completed in order to maintain or extend the current useful life of the bridge. 5.5 Future Growth In order to prepare for future growth requirements,the municipality of Clarington will consult our 'Official Plan'and 'Development Charges Background Study'. We have.also undertaken a number of Master Plans (Transportation and Fire as two very recent examples), Financial Impact Analysis of New Growth, and a number of discussion papers (Countryside Discussion Paper, Natural Heritage System Discussion Paper, Parks Open Space and Trails Discussion Paper, Intensification Discussion Paper and Economic Base and Employment Lands Discussion Paper) that will provide a significant amount of research upon which future growth implications will be based. One of the key aspects of the Official Plan is providing the Municipality of Clarington with a clear vision of how and where to accommodate future Page 3S - 15-80 growth. In doing so,the Municipality's Official Plan Review will provide a "local approach"to reaching the objectives of the Provincial and Regional Growth Plans. Clarington's current growth framework will be reviewed and updated to meet the requirements of both the Provincial Growth Plan and the Growing Durham Study using best practices of plan preparation, implementation and monitoring. Beginning with a design emphasis,the goal is not only to create great urban places, but also to improve how the land use planning is linked to infrastructure and fiscal planning. The Development Charges Background Study provides information regarding new growth related capital projects in order to accommodate growth. The municipality will incorporate these plans of the expected demand changes of our road and bridges inventories into subsequent versions of our AMP. The Development Charges Background Study which will be undertaken in late 2014 will provide the rationale for the demand change, present the estimated expansion requirements that would be necessary to meet the increased demand for each project, and produce reasoning of how undertaking this option would manage the obstacle. This report will also provide the total effect that the required costs associated with the expansion would have on the current and long term budget plans in accordance with the Development Charges Act. This will allow the ability to prepare for the future growth costs and fund the expansion over multiple budget years,therefore, not restricting funding for other required items. Incorporating the new assets into the AMP will pick up future asset replacement requirements. 15-81 Page 36 -- - — 6. 0 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY 6.1 Objective The objective of a financial strategy in the Asset Management Plan is to support the municipality's current financial planning and budgeting processes. The financial strategy will dictate the current funding resources utilized and the required funding to sustain the current capital asset inventories, achieve the desired level of service, and the projected growth. This will give Council and staff the ability to make more informed budget and service level decisions into the future. There are various capital resources used by the municipality in regards to funding the roads and bridges asset inventories: • Tax Levies • Reserves • Reserve Funds • Development Charges • External Financing (Ontario Power Generation &Canadian Pacific Rail funding and developer contributions) • Coordination with upper tier with responsibilities for water and sewer works • Debenture debt The municipality of Clarington's roads network relies on all the above resources for funding the current infrastructure requirements. While the smaller bridges inventory utilizes only the tax levy for funding, specialized bridge rehabilitation funding was provided by Canada-Ontario Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund—Intake 1 (COMRIF)within the previous three years to increase the current service level of multiple bridges in our inventory. In accordance with the provincial requirements,the asset management plan financial strategy is required to have an in-depth process for managing a budget shortfall. In the case of a shortfall,the province can decide to review the municipality's financial strategy and confirm that the shortfall is justifiable. In the province's review,they will analyze service levels to ensure the municipality has considered decreasing services levels where applicable to reduce financial restrictions. The province will also review that all possible asset management and financial strategies have been considered for funding,for example, is the use of debt a viable option and what would the impact be if debt was used for funding? — Page 37 — -- -- 15-82 6.2 Three Year Historical Infrastructure Investment The level of investment is important to maintain a specific and expected level of service and to ensure that optimum life expectancies of the assets are being achieved.Premature deterioration often results in unplanned repair costs that are typically much higher than planned maintenance costs and deferred maintenance can lead to shortened useful life. We have included the current year's budget for comparison. Repair& Rehabilitation Maintenance and Costs Mon- Replacement Annual Asset Replacement (Operating Infrastructure Costs Total Investment Class Value$ Exp) Solutions Costs (Capital Exp) Investment$ Level% 2010 Actual Roads 430,798,704 1,596,520 123,090 11,387,537 13,049,975 3.04% Bridges 68,324,203 16,315 16,602 404,150 437,067 0.64% Total $499,122,907 $1,612,835 $82,519 $11,791,687 $13,487,042 2.71% 2011 Actual Roads 452,765,201 1,654,383 38,249 8,492,422 10,174,267 2.25% Bridges 68,981,853 6,019 29,823 2,126,067 2,161,909 3.13% Total $521,747,054 $1,660,402 $57,285 $10,618,489 $12,336,175 2.37% 2012 Actual Roads 462,692,545 1,718,695 72,962 5,671,408 7,463,065 1.61% Bridges 69,876,321 14,815 17,698 2,274,293 2,306,806 3.30% Total $532,568,866 $1,733,510 $90,661 $7,945,701 $9,769,871 1.83% 2013 Budget Roads 475,439,890 1,800,909 20,000 5,445,512 7,266,421 1.53% Bridges 71,747,081 22,500 25,000 8,920,000 8,967,500 12.5% Total $547,186,971 $1,823,409 $45,000 $14,365,512 $16,233,921 2.97% 15-83 Page 38 6.3 Financial Funding Plan Roads In the following charts,the annual replacement costs are based on the asset's useful life. In future asset management plans,the priority,road class,condition and risk will be considered for the asset and the most suitable one will be chosen. Option #1 — 100% of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 10 years Annual 100%of Grant- Annual Optio Replacemen Infras. Reserve Reserve Federal Property Total Surplus/ n#1 tCosts Deficit Total Costs Funds s Gas Tax Taxation Tax Levy Funding (Deficit) 2014 4,213,519 6,013,459 10,226,978 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 945,300 4,873,167 (5,353,811) 2015 3,303,787 6,013,459 9,317,246 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 2,119,550 6,047,417 (3,269,829) 2016 2,932,518 6,013,459 8,945,977 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 3,293,800 7,221,667 (1,724,310) 2017 14,230,846 6,013,459 20,244,305 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 4,468,050 8,395,917 (11,848,388) 2018 10,235,241 6,013,459 16,248,700 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 5,642,300 9,570,167 (6,678,533) 2019 16,310,803 6,013,459 22,324,262 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 6,816,550 10,744,417 (11,579,845) 2020 3,481,519 6,013,459 9,494,978 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 7,990,800 11,918,667 2,423,689 2021 6,180,662 6,013,459 12,194,121 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 9,165,050 13,092,917 898,796 2022 5,897,017 6,013,459 11,910,476 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 10,339,300 14,267,167 2,356,691 2023 12,256,638 6,013,459 18,270,097 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 11,513,550 15,441,417 (2,828,680) 139,177,140 101,572,917 $(37,604,223) The above chart for Option#1 illustrates a financial funding plan for Roads over the next 10 years for 100 percent of our infrastructure deficit of$60.1 million spread evenly over those 10 years. Included in the Reserve Fund column are contributions from the rate stabilization reserve fund of$1 million, $100,000 from the Municipal Capital Worl<s,$3000 from Roads Capital and $31,867 from Roads Contributions. The Pits and Quarries reserve is contributing$300,000. A major portion of the annual Federal Gas Tax grant is included in the financial plan along with $500,000 from supplementary property taxation revenue pertaining to the Energy from Waste Facility that has not yet been incorporated into our tax base. For the tax levy contribution, a 2.75%annual increase is included. The tax levy contribution for 2014 is based on a 5 year historical average. At the 10th year(2023),there will be a deficit of$37.6 million that clearly shows the financial funding cannot support 100 percent of the infrastructure deficit within 10 years. Page 39 15-84 Option#2 - 50% of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years Annual 50%of Annual Option Replacement Infras. Reserve Grant-Federal Property Tax Surplus/ k2 Costs Deficit Total Costs Funds Reserves Gas Tax Taxation Levy Total Funding (Deficit) 2014 4,213,519 2,004,486 6,218,005 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 945,300 4,873,167 (1,344,838) 2015 3,303,787 2,004,486 5,308,273 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 2,119,550 6,047,417 739,144 2016 2,932,518 2,004,486 4,937,004 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 3,293,800 7,221,667 2,284,663 2017 14,230,846 2,004,486 16,235,332 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 4,468,050 8,395,917 (7,839,415) 2018 10,235,241 2,004,486 12,239,727 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 5,642,300 9,570,167 (2,669,560) 2019 16,310,803 2,004,486 18,325,289 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 6,816,550 10,744,417 (7,570,872) 2020 3,481,519 2,004,486 5,486,005 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 7,990,800 11,918,667 6,432,662 2021 6,180,662 2,004,486 8,185,148 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 9,165,050 13,092,917 4,907,769 2022 5,897,017 2,004,486 7,901,503 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 10,339,300 14,267,167 6,365,664 2023 12,256,638 2,004,486 14,261,124 1,134,867 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 11,513,550 15,441,417 1,180,293 $ 99,087,410 $101,572,927 $ 2,485,510 The above chart for Option#2 illustrates a financial funding plan for Roads over the next 10 years for 50 percent of our infrastructure deficit of$60.1 million spread evenly over 15 years. Included in the Reserve Fund column are contributions from the rate stabilization of$1 million,$100,000 from the Municipal Capital Works, $3000 from Roads Capital and $31,867 from Roads Contributions. The Pits and Quarries reserve is contributing$300,000. A major portion of the annual Federal Gas Tax grant is included in the financial plan along with $500,000 from the projected property taxation supplementary revenue to come from the Energy from Waste facility. For the tax levy contribution, a 2.75%annual increase is included. The tax levy contribution for 2014 is based on a 5 year historical average. At the 10th year(2023),there will be a surplus of$2.5 million which will be used up in the next 5 years. Option#3 — 25% of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years The chart below for Option#3 illustrates a financial funding plan for Roads over the next 10 years for 25 percent of our infrastructure deficit of$60.1 million evenly over 15 years which is similar to Option #2 except for the tax levy. The tax levy contribution for 2014 is based on a 5 year historical average. Spreading the infrastructure deficit over the 15 years at a rate of 25%allows the tax levy increase percentage to be lowered by 50%. At the 2023 year,there is a surplus of$2.9 million which will be used up in the next 5 year period. 15-85 Page 40 - -__ Annual Grant- Option Replacement 25%of Infrast. Reserve federal Gas Property Annual Surplus/ #i3 Costs Da-Mit 7otaI Costs_ Funds Reserves Tax Taxation Tax Levy_ Total Funding (Deficit) 2014 4,213,519 1,002,243 5,215,762 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 ffi 945,300- 4,873,167 - s 342,595 1,134,867 2015 3,303,787 1,002,243 4,306,030 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 1,906,050 5,833,917 1,527,887 1,134,867 2016 2,932,518 1,002,243 3,934,761 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 2,866,800 6,794,667 2,859,906 1,134,867 2017 14,230,846 1,002,243 15,233,089 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 3,827,550 7,755,417 7,477,672 1,134,867 2018 10,235,241 1,002,243 11,237,484 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 4,788,300 8,716,167 2,521,317 1,134,867 2019 16,310,803 1,002,243 17,313,046 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 5,749,050 9,676,917 7,636,129 1,134,867 2020 3,481,519 1,WZ,243 4,483,762 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 6,709,800 10,637,667 6,153,905 1,134,867 2021 6,180,662 1,-0OZ,243 7,182,905 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 7,670,550 11,598,417 4,415,512 1,134,867 2022 5,897,017 1,002,243 6,899,260 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 8,631,300 12,559,167 5,659,907 1,134,867 2023 12,256,638 1,002,243 13,258,881 300,000 1,993,000 500,000 9,592,050 13,519,917 261,036 1,134,867 $ 89,064,980 $ 91,965,417 $ 2,900,437 Bridges Option#1- 100% of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 10 years Annual 100%of Infrast. Annual Surplus/ Replacement Costs Deficit Total Costs Tax Levy Total Funding (Deficit) 2014 3,101,078 1,817,018 5,518,096 364,200 364,200 (5,153,896.00) 2015 492,352 1,817,018 2,309,370 791,200 791,200 (1,518,170.00) 2016 - 1,817,018 1,817,018 1,218,200 1,218,200 (598,818.00) 2017 - 1,817,018 1,817,018 1,645,200 1,645,200 (171,818.00) 2018 3,788,802 1,817,018 5,605,820 2,072,200 2,072,200 (3,533,620.00) 2019 4,146,647 1,817,018 5,963,665 2,499,200 2,499,200 (3,464,465.00) 2020 14,642,256 1,817,018 16,459,274 2,926,200 2,926,200 (13,533,074.00) 2021 - 1,817,018 1,817,018 3,353,200 3,353,200 1,536,182.00 2022 820,041 1,817,018 2,637,059 3,780,200 3,780,200 1,143,141.00 2023 - 1,817,018 1,817,018 4,207,200 4,207,200 2,390,182.00 $ 45,761,356 $ 22,857,000 $ (22,904,356) The above chart illustrates a financial funding plan for Bridges over the next 10 years with 100 percent of infrastructure deficit spread evenly over the next 10 years. There are no contributions from the reserve funds and reserves as these funds are used to their maximum potential for roads funding. The tax levy is cantributing 1%annually after the 2014 year and is based on a 5 year historical average. At the 10 yearmark(2023) there is a $22.9 million deficit that the tax levy cannot support. Page 41 15-86 F4pti®n 42 - 50% of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years Annual Replacement 100%of Infrast. Annual Surplus/ Costs Deficit Total Costs Tax Levy Total Funding (Deficit) 2014 3,701,078 605,673 4,306,751 364,200 364,200 (3,942,551) 2015 492,352 605,673 1,098,025 791,200 791,200 (306,825) 016 - 605,673 605,673 1,218,200 1,218,200 612,527 2017 - 605,673 605,673 1,645,200 1,645,200 1,039,527 2018 3,788,802 605,673 4,394,475 2,072,200 2,072,200 (2,322,275) 2019 4,146,647 605,673 4,752,320 2,499,200 2,499,200 (2,253,120) 2020 14,642,256 605,673 15,247,929 2,926,200 2,926,200 (12,321,729) 2021 - 605,673 605,673 3,353,200 3,353,200 2,747,527 71122 820,041 605,673 1,425,714 3,780,200 3,780,200 2,354,486 2023 - 605,673 605,673 4,207,200 4,207,200 3,601,527 $ 33,647,906 $22,857,000 $ (10,790,906) The above chart illustrates a financial funding plan for Bridges over the next 10 years with 50 percent of infrastructure deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years. There are no contributions from the reserve Funds and reserves as these funds are used to their maximum potential for roads funding. The tax levy is contributing 1%annually after the 2014 year and is based on a 5 year historical average. At the 10 year mark (2023)there is a $10.8 million deficit that will have to be defined in the next 5 years funding plan. Option#3— 100% of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years Annual Replacement 300%of Infrast. Total Costs Tax Levy Total Funding Annual Surplus/ Costs Deficit _ (Deficit) 2014 3,701,078 1,211,345 4,912,423 364,200 a 364,200 (4,548,223) 2015 492,352 1,211,345 1,703,697 791,200 791,200 (912,497) 2016 - 1,211,345 1,211,345 1,218,200 1,218,200 6,855 433,855 2017 - 1,211,345 1,211,345 1,645,200 1,645,200 2018 3,788,802 1,211,345 5,000,147 2,072,200 2,072,200 (2,927,947) 2019 4,146,647 1,211,345 5,357,992 2,499,200 2,499,200 (2,858,792) 2020 14,642,256 1,211,345 15,853,601 2,926,200 2,926,200 (12,927,401) 2,141,855 2021 - 1,211,345 1,211,345 3,353,200 3,353,200 2022 820,041 1,211,345 2,031,386 3,780,200 3,780,200 1,748,814 2023 - 1,211,345 1,211,345 4,207,200 4,207,200 2,995,855 $39,704,626 $22,857,000 $(16,847,626) The above chart illustrates a financial funding plan for Bridges over the next 10 years with 100 percent 15-$7 — --- _ Page 42 of infrastructure deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years. There are no contributions from the reserve funds and reserves as these funds are used to their maximum potential for roads funding. The tax levy is contributing 1%annually after the 2014 year and is based on a 5 year historical average. At the 10 year mark (2023)there is a $16.8 million deficit that will have to be defined in the next 5 years funding plan. Recommendations Due to the substantial deficit in annual infrastructure, it is critical that a plan to increase road and bridge infrastructure funding be developed. The implementation of capital asset accounting software (CityWide) in the near future will provide extensive assistance in the process of determining the appropriate plan for handling the current infrastructure deficit. This software will provide multiple options that could be undertaken in order to meet the annual funding requirements. There are various processes that can be implemented to decrease the annual deficit; some of the options will not require specific increases in financial contributions. Again, our recommendations are based on life span of the asset in being the determining factor for replacement. This will be broadened in future AMP's as detailed in some of the above sections as this is currently a severely limiting factor for this version of the Municipality's AMP. An increase in tax levies is an expected option to increase funding for roads and bridges. But,this option alone would not commonly be a wise option. Due to the substantial value of the deficit,the tax rate increase required to fund the full annual deficit would be excessive for the community members to endure. This option would be best suited to fund a portion of the deficit, aside from the entire deficit. Providing additional funding from Reserve Funds to decrease the annual deficit is a viable option provided for here. There would need to be a review of current retained balances in the Reserve Funds, to determine if the municipality has the capacity to decrease the balance maintained in the Reserve Funds and provide additional funding for the annual deficit to further utilize this option. A short term solution would be debt financing or debentures. In order to gradually implement other funding sources, debt financing can fund the annual capital deficit currently. This option will not provide a permanent solution, but will provide current resources until a permanent funding plan is in place. The final solution option that can be exercised in order to decrease the annual infrastructure deficit is to review the current levels of service provided by the municipality. Decreasing the current level of service provided to the public would allow costs required for infrastructure to decrease,therefore, decreasing the deficit. For our current purposes, it is recommended that for the Roads component Option#2-50%of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years be utilized in our AMP. At the 10th year (2023),there will be a surplus of$2.5 million.With respect to Bridges, it is recommended that Option#2 —50%of Infrastructure Deficit spread evenly over the next 15 years be selected. At the 10 year mark (2023) there is a $10.8 million deficit.This is based on a total 3.75%tax levy increase annually and a net Page 43 15-88 effect of an $8.3 million deficit. This deficit can be addressed by selective utilization of debt facilities for several of the more significant projects.This will be refined in our next iteration of the Municipality's AMP that will be based on factors other than the life span of the asset in being the determining factor for replacement. 15-89 — -- Page 44 — — Cla rft MR LEGAL REPORT LEGAL DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: LGL-012-13 File#: L2030-07-03 Subject: FORCED ROAD —4826 CONCESSION ROAD 6, NEWTONVILLE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Council either, (a) pass a by-law to close that portion of Concession Road 6 shown as Part 3 on Attachment 5 to this Report and convey its interest in such land to Peter Andrew Mian; or (b) advise Jo-Ann and Peter Mian that no action will be taken in response to any of the options that they have presented to Council. Submitted by: Reviewed by Andre C. Allison, B. Comm., LL.B. Franklin Wu, MAOM Muni ipal Solicitor Chief.Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 16-1 REPORT NO.: LGL-012-13 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 This report will address several of the issues that were raised by Jo-Ann and Peter Mian in their letter to Members-of Council dated November 8, 2013 (Attachment 1). In their letter, Mr. and Mrs. Mian requested that Council "remove the Forced Road designation" from that portion of Concession Road 6 that is shown as Part 2 on Plan 40R-15830 (Attachment 2). In this Report, Part 2 on Plan 40R-15830 will be referred to as the "Forced Road". 1.2 At the November 18, 2013 Council meeting, Rob MacDonald and Joseph Sinacori made delegations in response to Mr. and Mrs. Mian's request. Copies of Mr. MacDonald's and Mr. Sinacori's written submissions are attached to this Report (Attachments 3 and 4). 1.3 Attachment 5 to this Report is a map showing 4826 Concession Road 6, Newtonville and some of the surrounding properties. The portion of Concession Road 6 east of Gilmore Road that is registered in Clarington's name and maintained year round by Clarington is identified as Part 1. The portion of Concession Road 6 that is registered in Clarington's name and seasonally maintained by Clarington is identified as Part 2. The portion of the Forced Road that is seasonally maintained by Clarington is identified as Part 3. The portion of the Forced Road that is maintained year round by the Municipality of Port Hope is identified as Part 4. 1.4 In simple terms, the issue is whether Council should close all or some portion of the Forced Road (Parts 3 and 4 on Attachment 5), or leave things as they are today. 2.0 OPTIONS 2.1 In their letter dated November 8, 2013, Mr. and Mrs. Mian requested that Council remove the forced road designation and allow them, after a period of 1 year, to gate their "driveway" where it meets East Townline Road (OPTION 1). 2.2 At the November 18, 2013 Council meeting, Mr. Mian presented the following two additional options for Council's consideration: OPTION 2: The Municipality can purchase the Forced Road at fair market value and assume full liability for it, improve and maintain it to provincial standards, and install a fence and foliage alongside their property line for privacy. OPTION 3: The Municipality can remove the forced road designation and provide an access "road" for the residents of 4855 Concession Road 6 off of East Townline Road. 16-2 REPORT NO.: LGL-012-13 PAGE 3 3.0 DISCUSSION i 3.1 In Clarington, there are many kilometers of"forced" roads. They are also sometimes referred to as "trespass" or "given" roads. Examples include parts of East Beach Road and West Beach Road in Bowmanville, Lakeshore Road in Newtonville, and Concession Road 5 (Sommerville Drive) in Orono. 3.2 Forced roads are publicly used roads that cross private property. Their origins often date back to the 1800's. Almost all forced roads were created because physical constraints made it difficult to build a road within the municipal road allowance. Even though private individuals have paper title to the land over which a forced road runs, it is a public highway if there has been an "implied dedication" by the owner and an "implied acceptance" by the municipality. 3.3 W.D. (Rusty) Russell (an acknowledged expert in the field of municipal roads) in his book "Russell on Roads (Second Edition)" provided the following explanation of forced roads: "Where a trespass/given/forced road has by common law, become a "public highway"it is, in most cases, part of a larger parcel of land, still registered, in private ownership. Once a road has acquired this classification, the owner cannot stop the public from using it." 3.4 Issues respecting forced roads often arise when properties are sold. Mr. Russell described the situation as follows: "In most cases, the original owner of the land who permitted the trespass (most likely in the 1800s) and his children, have long since left the area. Then follows a succession of owners, who, over the years, have also acquiesced in the use of the road by the public. That by itself does not give the municipality legal(paper) title, since that area is still in the name of the present, or past, registered owner. It is usually a new owner, who, on learning that the municipality does not have paper title to this long-standing highway encroachment across his land, rises up in righteous indignation." 3.5 As Mr. MacDonald correctly pointed out, the Forced Road can be traced at least as far back as 1861 (pre-Confederation). Far more recently, the Forced Road was identified as a "FORCED ROAD" on a 1994 survey of the Mian property (Part 2 on Plan 40R-15830 - see Attachment 2). It was also clearly shown as a "TRAVELLED (Variable Width) ROAD" on a survey of 4855 Concession Road 6 (see Item 7 of Attachment 4). Staff do not know the date that this survey was prepared. 3.6 In my opinion, based on all of the information that I have reviewed, the Forced Road was long ago impliedly dedicated and accepted, and it is therefore a public highway. 16-3 REPORT NO.: LGL-012-13 PAGE 4 3.7 Other parts of Concession Road 6 that used to be classified as "forced" have been conveyed to the Municipality at no cost. 3.8 The Forced Road has been recognized as being part of Concession Road 6 for decades. This is why all of the properties that front onto the Forced Road have "Concession Road 6" municipal addresses (not East Townline Road). 3,9 The request by Mr. and Mrs. Mian to do something about the Forced Road is not the first such request. In a letter to the Mayor and Members of Council dated April 24, 2012, Lorraine Wright requested that this "municipal road" be maintained year round. Mrs. Wright lived on the property from the time that the house was built in 2000 (building permit #99.0522 was issued September 13, 1999) until it was sold to Mr. Mian in July of this year. 3.10 Although it is not necessary to deal with all of the issues raised by the residents, staff feel that it is necessary to respond to the following comments in the letter dated November 8, 2013 from Mr. and Mrs. Mian for clarification and completeness: (a) "Peter and Jo-Ann Mian are the physical owners of the dirt road identified as Plan 40R-15830; Part 11 in both deed and title. As such we are liable for anything that happens on that piece of property." Staff do not know what is meant by "physical owners ... in both deed and title". Legal (paper) title to the Forced Road is registered in the name of Peter Andrew Mian. Mr. and Mrs. Mian have every right to be concerned about potential liability, but they have misstated the extent of that potential liability. The Forced Road is a Class 6 highway which means that the Province's minimum maintenance standards do not apply to it. But that does not mean that the Municipality does not have a legal obligation to maintain it. Because the Forced Road is a public highway, the Municipality must "keep it in a state of repair that is reasonable in the circumstances, including the' character and location of the highway..." (see Section 44 of the Municipal Act, 2001 and Powell v. West Nissouri (Township), [1999] O.J. No. 2299 (Sup. Ct.). In other words, the legal responsibility for any public road rests with the municipality that has jurisdiction over it. (b) "The Forced Road designation to that piece of property dates back to a time when farmers needed to use that dirt road for the purpose of accessing fields. Currently, there are no farmers in the area that require access to our road." The first sentence is accurate. It would also apply to virtually every forced road in the Municipality. Staff do not know how many farmers are using the Forced Road today. However, there is a legal adage "Once a public road, always a public road", so the fact that the type of use or user has 16-4 REPORT NO.: LGL-012-13 PAGE 5 changed does not affect the legal status of the road. Even if a forced road is no longer used by the public and is closed (but not conveyed), it would still be a public road (Aikens v. Puslinch (Township), [1999] O.J. No. 2774 (Sup Ct.)). (c) "The situation as it current stands poses a legal paradox, which the Title Insurer will pursue on behalf of the property owners." Forced roads are admittedly a legal paradox for most people. Most home buyers today acquire title insurance when they purchase a home. Staff do not know what claim Mr. and Mrs. Mian have made with their title insurer. (d) "A few local residents who reside on East Townline Road use the dirt road out of convenience to travel to/from their homes. This road is not accessible during the winter season. During the winter months those residents must travel a short distance south to Concession 5, which is paved and maintained year round by the Municipality." These statements are accurate. However, the fact that the road is only seasonally maintained does not change its status as a forced road. (e) "... a posted speed limit of 50kms per hour..." There is a speed limit sign on Concession Road 6 where it meets Gilmore Road. At the point where Concession Road 6 is no longer maintained year round (where Part 1 meets Part 2 on Attachment 2), there is a sign that warns users that the Forced Road is unimproved, that it is only seasonally maintained, and that they should proceed at their own risk. (f) "... the property identified on Plan 40R-15830 Part 11 is private property... The Forced Road is not private property. It is a public highway and it was explicitly identified as such on this Reference Plan (see Attachment 2). The words "FORCED ROAD" are clearly written within Part 2 on Plan 40R- 15830. (g) "... the municipality,has not maintained that piece of land prior to July of 1999 (see document 2). Further this document clearly illustrates that the dirt road leading from the front of our house to East Townline Road is in fact our driveway." These statements are not correct. Clarington and its predecessors have been seasonally maintaining that portion of the Forced Road shown as Part 3 on Attachment 5 for decades. The Municipality of Port Hope and its predecessors have been maintaining the portion of the Forced Road shown as Part 4 year round for decades. The document referred to is an Application For Property Access that was prepared and filed by Mrs. Wright as a pre-condition to being allowed to 16-5 REPORT NO.: LGL-012-13 PAGE 6 build a house on 4826 Concession Road 6. In order to obtain a building permit, Mrs. Wright had to demonstrate that the property fronted onto a municipal road that was maintained year round. This document simply demonstrates that not all of the Forced Road was maintained year round. The document itself refers to a "Forced Road Allowance" that existed well before it could ever have functioned as a "driveway" for 4826 Concession Road 6. (h) "The only resident who currently requires use of a small portion of our driveway to access their property is located at 4855. As confirmed by title search, the owner of this property does not have right-of-way over our driveway." It is correct that the owner of 4855 Concession Road 6 does not have a deeded right-of-way over the Forced Road, but they do not need one because it is a public highway. 4.0 RECOMMENDATION 4.1 Given that the Forced Road is a public highway, it is recommended that Council either, (a) pass a by-law to close that portion of Concession Road 6 shown as Part 3 on Attachment 5 to this Report and convey its interest in such land to Peter Andrew Mian; or (b) advise Mr. and Mrs. Mian that no action will be taken in response to any of the options that they have presented to Council. 4.2 In the previous section, I have purposefully distinguished between the portion of the Forced Road that is shown as Part 3 on Attachment 3 and the portion of the Forced Road that is shown as Part 4. Under no circumstances should the Municipality close and convey that portion of the Forced Road shown as Part 4. This would potentially prohibit the owners of 4855 Concession Road from accessing their property as they have for decades (over a public road) and it would expose the Municipality to a claim for damages. 4.3 Staff cannot recommend OPTION 1 described in Section 2.1 of this Report for reasons set out in Section 4.2 above. 4.4 Staff cannot recommend OPTION 2 described in Section 2.2 of this Report. The only reason that the Municipality would want to buy any property would be if it wanted to expand upon the usage of the Forced Road either by widening it or installing services under it. There is no intention to do either. 4.5 Staff cannot recommend OPTION 3 described in Section 2.2 of this Report for reasons set out in Section 4.2 above and because there is no reason that the Municipality should pay to construct a new driveway to service one property (4855 16-6 REPORT NO.: LGL-012-13 PAGE 7 Concession Road 6) to replace a public road that provides access not only to that property, but also to possible future houses on 4870 Concession Road 6 (currently owned by Charles Ibbitson) and the property fronting onto the Forced Road that is currently owned by Kenneth Wright (see Attachment 5). CONCURRENCE 5.1 The Director of Engineering Services and Director of Operations concur with the recommendation in this Report. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not applicable. Attachment 1: Letter dated November 8, 2013 from Jo-Ann and Peter Mian Attachment 2: Plan 40R-15830 Attachment 3: Delegation of Robert McDonald Attachment 4: Delegation of Joseph Sinacori Attachment 5: Map of 4826 Concession Road 6 and Surrounding Area Persons to be notified of Council's decision: Jo-Ann and Peter Mian Rob MacDonald Joseph Sinacori 16-7 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 TO REPORT LGL-012-13 November 8th, 2013 Clarington Municipal Council Members C/O Mayor Adrian Foster 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville Ontario L1C 3A6 Dear Mayor and Council Members, We respectfully ask to have this item included in the upcoming Town Council Meeting scheduled for November 18th,2013: Our Request We request the municipality remove the Forced Road designation to our deeded property(Plan 40R- 15830;Part li). This request comes from our concern regarding unobstructed use of our property by some local residents who travel at excessive speeds past our home and the associated safety and liability concerns to us. Our intention is to gate our driveway;thereby eliminating our safety concerns and reducing our liability. Sequence of Events On May 10th,2013 we purchased our home at 4826 Concession 6 in Newtonville. At the time of purchase we did not know the property included a dirt road. On May 26th, 2013 we did a walk-through of the,property and had an opportunity to visit with the previous home owner, Lorraine Wright. Lorraine advised us that our purchase included a dirt road to the south side of the property. On July 19th,2013 at approximately 6PM we met with our real estate lawyer,Mark Woitzik to sign the purchasing documents for our new home. At that time, w6 were not provided with a copy of the title or deed. On July 22nd,2013 at approximately 5:30PM Peter received an unannounced visit to our home by Mr. Murray Devitt,Operations Supervisor-Municipality of Clarington. Mr. Devitt advised Peter that he was going to"remove 2 signs that read, "Private Driveway No Trespassing"(see photograph 1)which had been posted at the east entrance of our dirt road off East Townline Road and in front of our house in 1999 by the previous homeowner Ken Wright. Mr. Devitt explained that although the dirt road is private property, it is seasonally maintained by the municipality, Mr. Devitt advised that if we had any questions we should contact the municipality. Page 1 of 4 16-8 7' S , 6 v 46, •C• F i s ) v i 1 S .4 w ., .._.tea....-,.tea.- _�•_�>,� :__i=. .>�G _ ', On July 23`d, 2013 at approximately 10AM we contacted Mark Woitzilc to inquire about securing a copy of our deed as well as confirm the disposition of the dirt road. Up until this point we had not received a copy of the title or deed from our lawyer. On July 31",2013 at approximately 1PM Mark Woitzik asked us to supply photographs of the road stemming from the intersection of Gilmour Road/Concession 6 and East Townline Road/Concession 5. The purpose of these photographs was to establish that from either direction leading to our property there were clearly posted signs reading, "No Exit" (see photographs 2,3&4). On August 16th,2013 Mark Woitzik advised us that as owners of the dirt road we could close it as quickly as we wished. Out of courtesy to the local residents living on East Townline Road, we posted signs alongside of it advising them that the road would be closed in 30 days on September 16th(see photograph 5). In addition, Mark Woitzik prepared a letter to the occupants of a home located on the south side of our dirt road (4855)advising them that access to the road would be closed off and that they would have to access their property from East Townline Road (see document 1). On August 23`d,2013 at approximately 7:30AM;10-Ann and our three children received a second unannounced visit to our home from Murray Devitt. Subsequent to which there has been an exchange of correspondences with the municipality. On August 28th,2013 the occupants of the home located at 4855 received the aforementioned letter from Mark Woitzik via Purolator Courier. On August 29th, 2013 we received a letter from the municipality(dated August 27`h)advising us that if we proceed with gating the road the municipality will commence legal action to remove it. On August 29th—30t", 2013 we consulted with Mark Woitzik and Real Estate Litigator John Rowinski regarding next steps. At the conclusion of the meetings,the following was established: Peter and Jo-Ann Mian are the physical owners of the dirt road identified as Plan 40R-15830; Part 11 in both the deed and title. As such we are liable for anything that happens on that piece of our property. The Forced Road designation to that piece of our property dates back to a time when farmers needed to use that dirt road for the purpose of accessing fields. Currently,there are no farmers in the area that require access to our road. The situation as it currently stands poses a legal paradox;which the Title Insurer will pursue on behalf of the property owners. Page 2 of 4 16-10 • f � r r I . 1' f I r r , + s - � I i - I r.11 b. •}Y 1 }�� � II r ••' S 5 I }r II� a' I , ,I _ � A._. .;t�• 16_ 1 ' u 1 t � f F r i i i s t' y ti i y 'a�-r, '' f�' -. � - .y�r .".yea.?•, �� r�n •� .} t t 4 • f p` fi px `r C "r �l ,p Iva _ _,... _+`.• •' ,. „i, 4 .',a ..� X175" s� J ,��'x -ViNE� r j ,7-"d rvd"�jmf• s.� ( -r ,,.-�C."�' + ., �. 1 t 9 iA O Z WwQ Ci Z >= C/) D N � 0ZY >= 0 W Q UJ m LLJ W UJ 0 a. CL 0 Cl) 3: cn J 0 kkkl Jo-Ann Mian From- Marl<Woitzik <woitzik @rogers.com> Sent: August-27-13 9:01 AM To: Jo-Ann Mian;Peter Mian Subject: mian.doc August 27,2013 Occupant 4855 Concession Road 6 Newtonville, Ontario . LOA 1 JO Without prejudice Dear Occupant: Re: Peter Andrew Mian&Jo-Aim Mian 4826 Concession 6 Road,Newcastle, Ontario LOA 1 JO Please be advised that I represent Peter Andrew Mian and Jo-Ann Mian,the owners of 4826 Concession 6 Road,Newcastle,Ontario LOA 1JO. I understand that you have been accessing your property over a private road owned by my clients. The title search confxrins that you do not have a right-of-way over my clients property. I further understand that the previous owners advised you that at some point this road you currently have been using would be closed and you would be required to incur the expense of installing your own access to Townline Road. Be advised that effective September 15,2013,the road will be gated and your access will be limited to Townline Road. Effective; October 1, 2013,my clients will be closing the private road permanently and your access will no longer be permitted.Any access over this road after October 1,2013 will be considered trespassing. Yours very truly, Marls Woitzik i 16-15 A few local residents who reside on East Townline Road use the dirt road out of convenience to travel to/from their homes. This road is not accessible during the winter season. During the winter months those residents must travel a short distance south to Concession 5,which is paved and maintained year round by the municipality. To avoid both costly and lengthy legal proceedings our lawyers advised us to seek resolution through City Council as a first step;which is why we have requested to meet. What Brought Us Here? When we decided to move our family from the city we looked for a home in Clarington that would provide us with both beauty and serenity. After a lengthy search we found our new home in Newtonville. We could never have imagined the issues that would surface 3 days after we moved in. When we purchased our home on May 10`x',2013 we did not know nor did we care to own a road. Murray Devitt's unannounced visit to our home on July 22nd at 5:30PM brought to light a number of significant concerns that needed to be addressed. Living beside a dirt road that sits no more than 23 meters from the front step of our house with a posted speed limit of 50kms per hour poses significant safety and liability concerns to our family. As a comparison,school zones in Ontario have designated speed limits of 40kms per hour on fully paved roads with traffic devices. Our road is a narrow dirt path riddled with numerous potholes that in our opinion should be travelled at no greater than 15kms per hour. In addition,the male resident of 4855 has adopted a routine of walking his two German Shepherd's past the front of our home while our dogs are on the front lawn. On several occasions,the male has had difficulty restraining his dogs as they pass our home. We are deeply concerned that one day the male will lose control of his dogs and cause harm to either our family or pets. Based on the current circumstances, our children;Tyler(age 12),Saxon (age 10)and Breanna (age 7) are safer playing on the road in front of their schools than they are playing in front of their own home in rural Newtonville (see photographs 6, 7&8). Our Proposed Resolution As we continued our research into this matter a number of documents were brought to light reinforcing the property identified on Plan 40R-15830 Part II is private property and that the municipality has not maintained that piece of land prior to July of 1999(see document 2). Further this document clearly illustrates that the dirt road leading from the front of our house to East Townline Road is in fact our driveway. The only local resident who currently requires use of a small portion of our driveway to access their property is located at 4855. As confirmed by title search, the owner of this property does not have right-of-way over our driveway. Page 3 of 4 16-16 f '1t f � � i j i L' 1 IN i t .L t,i ? 1 4. i I (/ +. .�r i.� }, � 1 r „ �! r ; _ yp 1 r r "o. '"� i _—. .� J t � 'i � i ), � .'V r;�... ' j '. -' � E ti �t a��F � ���w Kr � _ i ` �' .+�_ -..[� ;z, r; ti �. ���, ;,fir 4 �' �x i ,fib".y � . r ,,r f xt �' � � r r "� �. . 'r � i '� j%' . "':t '� F %:. - ,� x, ' , =. 1 ' �' y, �. 'k't�r� � , r -, _ � -. 1 �' 1�'' .i 1``1I � t r. '�F. � �� to Y � ��� ��:,� � � :c.�. ' , f;,. •� 'r .,R _ _ �`�t� 6 i r��e �� s _ . � .. ,� _. - � .. `, `tk �.� 4M` {{ � n ��. . rim_ ., �` - �' 1.�. .� - ri �.L'. '..}'� wr.- a z�'� �' �.lr:_ y _ »+.� +', _ - _ _ 4(4,. ii �.� _ r � � � "� 1' ..5.. _ �_.- - � - _ <[�' .� � �' i - �..��, �cic= -., ai�= t �31F �p� '"Y"-j -r � j � ��,�ss ffi � t<_ ._ � ::.� a _ , �� '� � , l 4 `\ � � '�`' �' tit:: , l .. ���� � �� l l,r klunkc,, 3-4, :rom Tuniv,-, Z L 4^1% -J Ctreel DIM W."3: T o r C,o rn m:-rc n iis daI J a-n S --an. 7- 7 18-20 Council,we would like to resolve this matter as quickly as possible and focus on enjoying our property and community. Our intention for the short-term is to gate our driveway from the east end of our property to the foot of the existing entrance of 4855. Considering the immediate impact this will have to the residents of 4855,we are willing to rent that portion of our driveway to them for a monthly fee (to be determined by our insurance company) until such time that they can construct their own driveway from East Townline Road to a maximum of 12 months;after which we would move the gate to the edge of our driveway at East Townline Road. Under the circumstances we believe this resolution to be fair and advantageous to both parties concerned. We are open to alternative resolutions from Council that will alleviate our concerns and ensure our rights as property owners are protected. We welcome you to visit our home so you may better understand and experience our concerns. We respectfully ask for an expedient,resolution of this matter. Yours truly, o- nn an Pe ian 4 6 Concession 6 Newtonville,ON LOA 1J0 Cc: Mark Woitzik John Rowinski Stewart Title Insurance Company Page 4 of 4 16-21 —' CONCESSION 6 30 I NOlvatura al 70 PLAM 40R- 5 � tc mlvgttD twla tK I� WI17RSKl. NESEIYEOAWMITU ry LOT 2 "'o:' ,E LOT 1 I Ie N.c,.:`C b.1991 ( ; N ,4 d- f bt 1. Im..• ,n�w.rv.Al...w r.una ur..lnra.mn, I `.nmvou�' tlD,°mn 'tleurn�rr�� --_ m)11•aY _Iar.L• Nn. :111.11 ' 1II' Iw�.•,l.e" I W�r1e,_f�Nllry� IAYN RT4ISENR SR 7K 6E 451[f -� �-�—�-'—.I.A1•,�n9•la•rtu� Nn� An Print aES12E0N tt"W W..4 aA,naa � �' Rood Allowance between Concessions 5 and 6 �i � MEDDLE PART LaRTi01l AREA INSi.NO. ,aj 4¢Lmr I PARTGtID 1,EDAttl0mi,am Aae, PM P z e nr X8.4 1.11.S.s 1 ; maun,S IB,LWIP of[VAIE 92014 hdlT o O I B YN DVALl"W"Win, 14521— «rnodtrl /+ c - � o j; I - PLAN OF SURVEY OF PAR . a - t- T OF LOT I CONCESSION 6 . }x PART 1 - � �I O GEOGRAPHIC tOtNSHIP OF CLARKC• a I UUNIGIPALI9Y OF CLIRINGTON.REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF OURNAR Re Y v } LOT 2 8 a, � LOT 1 �,I c,F.nILL11'o.L.S..lA1 CONCESSION N`'A111 5 � I �xs a Ita - { W PA1i N Ilm.lin,XID111 dt) F nO1Q All lE@0 �°`�'�d\1\l� +r'••p1 p?I a 7P .anm1 'rma a I E= a u wno U ar. N1Olu S�W Oar IAa .. •..�4„+� .. AYa sl•)V j I�1 [iiS. M.. 115]]1 � • tll. laamn N`Ira 14 YA7"lD•O_Q,I �E? nol OaaIG It13.tA1°.Lt, ' ?3F w i.�,„„„ a,al Dwn7 cr.ittutxwI B.L.r. ' *pnyB aO;Ai�.'S• A91•a .r / 0.' I 0 at°1i erXn,II N.nre SAF E4� 0r• nrw,I r PA �'rrayt r PNt•IT3SSDDIy SI.94 NBN L11y.IaAl µ.17RR y '6". ns, oaoa iasm Zulu; InTamf - Vs• rS2,Sd•I �r z Ar-n.r., N'rr, '1�,>, 0..-, 4 ;q �=p 6 D77°r Xprt NC E0 Io AIl IIEw a nrn6 t 9 aa-Y rc t NB u1nn 0 NIt¢m Ai,tr la rpvXR t w ae-roNt[x ImfEu BN p A ltt ru tc IIM No. NloslD w �''-1,j.• 1 I}11,]11'61/1 SUIVEI«•T SIRrIMATE' I ISee Pim R S—j by C.r.rw,",m D,L.S.,Ill.d ld n dndl Y`�+� G"^ 4 I I tmm IW r d ir•6. /� i.K-1=91lW A lam AW IX gGWtC MM tM�kB 7A[161SIAT ASI 11D tt pWllDd O 5 :,r 2mM"aWS1N[0xLYIs%,GlOrmlSjml. 4A4 6 1p A 6. o ml.5,r lk 1El Dltc LtRn 1 Hn I I CANIMMI tW 01 NOl A IW I I Q'IDIUM hint lit NARit6 B'M PINnIXA ADD. I 1,7 I CHARLES F.ftILRT P.RNG.,O.L.S, I B,YTARIO 1 URD SURMYOR D I P.O.B-20073.Nnneo I, Ontarl° m n LID tin MI 117-1009 -0 = -1'-013-3 O 12 ( 1U I g I tiuli rn'1 t 1 z 8 {b 12 I ip r Z o O N N • WO ATTACHMENT NO.3 TO REPORT LGL-0012-13 Mr. Mayor and council Good evening, and thank you for this opportunity to address council and bring forward the concerns and opposition, of the local residents, concerning any proposal to close the forced road across Lot 1, at the eastern end of Concession 6, in the former township of Clarke.No one seems to be sure when this forced road, which traverses, Lots 1, 2 and 3,was opened,but we do know that it's shown on the Tremaine's map of 1861, so we know it predates Confederation. This road was forced by the early settlers of the area, to allow'them access to the Hope/Clarke boundary, and to the hamlet and mill at Decker's Hollow. Our ancestors were hard working and industrious people, but they certainly weren't stupid, which is exactly why the road was forced instead of following the road allowance. Had they followed the road allowance, they would have had to build two bridges to ford the Ganaraska river, and a small tributary to get to the Hope/Clarke boundary, and then another bridge would have been required to span the river, as they headed south on the boundary.All of this, because the river meanders south east as it leaves Clarke and enters Hope. Not only did these insightful settlers save themselves a lot of work, and provide a shorter route to their destination, their foresight saved future taxpayers a very large sum of money, by us not having to maintain and replace the three aforementioned bridges.Ts it irony, that the very :forced road built by our ancestors, is what in all likely hood, created the severance for the lot, on which the Mians, who want the road closed,now reside? Me thinks,those that went before us, would not be amused! I have with me to present to council, a petition signed by local residents, all of whom live within proximity of this forced road,.in opposition to any closure of this road to the general public. Worth noting, is that not one household approached for a signature to this petition, declined! In fact some were almost irate in their opposition,to the suggestion of it's possible closure! Also noteworthy, is the fact that at least four of the signatories on this petition are descendants, of settlers that acquired their land from the Crown in this .neighbourhood, of which I am amongst. Our roots run deep, and many of us have a strong affinity for the land,traditions and our rural way of life! While many others on this petition have lived their whole lives in our environ,with the exception of Eldorado's little scheme in 1986, we haven't had any neighbour issues, and newcomers have always been made welcome, When I encountered Mrs. Mian, we had an exchange of ideas regarding the ownership and use of the forced road.At that juncture she informed me that her lawyer, was at that time, working at having the road legally closed,As we now know Mr,Allison, the municipality's lawyer,had to school their lawyer, on the subject of forced roads, and their lawyer couldn't legally accomplish their objective! Part of the irony of that attempt, is that their lawyer's courier used the very road that the Mians feel is unnecessary, to deliver the premature, and not legally binding notification to the occupants of 4885 Conc.Rd. 6, informing them that they could no longer access their property from the forced road! Having spoke to Mr.Allison, it seems his position is that the municipality should keep this forced road open, allowing the general public to have the use of it.The municipality has to my knowledge, always maintained it on a seasonal basis.Apparently the municipality continues to have access and rights to the forced road by maintaining it. A couple of years ago when the culvert at the eastern end got swept away, it was not the property owners that installed the new 16-23 culvert and all the truckloads of gravel! In the event of any kind of emergency, given the distance to Police and ambulance services,the fire department are our first responders. If this forced road is closed and the fire truck has to travel around, via Cone. Rd. 5, to respond to an emergency at any of the addresses at the eastern end of Concession Rd. 6, or on the Clarke side of the Hope/Clarke boundary, it adds 2 - 1/2 miles, and two more stop signs,to their response time! Who wants to be responsible for that lost time if someone dies, because of that additional delay?When I raised this point to Mrs. Mian,her response - "not my problem!" I spoke to one of Clarington's firefighters, who drives the fire truck,regarding their use of forced roads. His reply was that they would always use a forced road when seasonably possible, if it's the quickest route, because that 10 minute magic window, is their priority. The only exception he said would be if its gated and locked,because of the problems they've experienced with the locked gate into the Newcastle service center on the 401,via Brownsville road. He said they always go around, because they have had so many problems getting it open, or not being able to get it open at all, and so much time gets wasted. I've been told that the volume of traffic, the speed at which it travels, and their proximity to the road are of grave concern for the Mians. I contacted Councillor Partner before the Mians had even taken possession to which she can attest. The word was already out,that it was their intention to close the road as soon as possible,after taping possession, It was not my bravado, that put that information out there! Might I suggest,were the road closure that important to a litigatious individual,that said closure should have been made a condition of the sale. That their lawyer ill advised them, shouldn't be our problem. They had to anticipate that there would be some opposition to an attempted road closure, and if the dwelling was too close to the road, and the volumes of traffic too high,that should have been taken into account. In other words - Caveat Emptor! That the volumes of traffic are a concern, only reinforces the need for this road to remain open! How can you have it both ways?The road isn't necessary,but the volume of traffic on it bothers us!As for the distance their house is from the road, it's the same distance as the day they purchased it, and it has to be at least 50 feet. There are thousands of dwellings that are considerably closer to highways, were the volume of traffic is hundreds of times more, at far,far greater speeds! One thing Mrs Mian repeated to me several times on that occasion,was that she didn't like people driving by at "mach k,which might be a little bit of an exaggeration, as this is 2284 M.F.H. I would hazard to guess,that given that state of the forced road that 20 M.P.H. would be a speed that would be appropriate, but maybe someone from council has had an opportunity to pass this way lately, and could share their observation, so as to give the rest of council a neutral view. Mrs.Mian informed me if she couldn't get a road closure,her contingency plan was to plant a tall hedge to protect her children and small dogs. I understand her need for security and privacy, but she has a huge back yard, of probably an acre, and 25 acres of woods. Surely they ought to be able to keep them safe. The people just up the road use invisible fencing for their dogs, and are very happy with it! Dogs in Clarington are not allowed to run at large, and since their dwelling is right at the edge of their property,their dogs they have to restrained in some way, so as to prevent them straying on to all three of their very immediate neighbours properties. As for her children's safety,I suspect that since they apparently came from an urban area, that their probably not without some street smarts. To my knowledge none of us had to 16-24 resort to chaining our children to protect them from traffic. She also mentioned liability I oncerns, for people using this road, and certainly this could be something Mr.Allison could speak to, but the common sense part of me suspects, with the amount of forced roads in this province, their must be legal safeguards for forced road owners. Conversely,they could convey to the municipality the deed for the forced road, as apparently happened on Lots 2 & 3. Then there would definitely be no concerns of liability on their part. You can't be liable for what you don't own! I would be curious to hear from the municipality the number of liability claims they've received regarding this stretch of road, in the last two hundred years.There are presently signs stating that its a seasonal road to be used at your own risk. The Previous-owner received a building permit under the premise that the forced road was their driveway where.it reached the Hope/Clarke boundary, at the very eastern limit of their property. They built their dwelling on the very western extremity, 1/4 mile away from their access, adjacent to the seasonally maintained portion owned by the municipality.They never used their so called driveway, always accessing their house from the municipality's road. Then they wanted the municipality to upgrade and maintain year round, the seasonally maintained portion coming to the western edge of their property. We don't want the road closed, but if your going to, shouldn't it be closed at the eastern end of the municipality's road, forcing them to use their driveway and access to the boundary? Since it appears the new owners also access their house from the municipality's road,not using their so called driveway, this probably will not be amenable to them as they'll have to travel around, as they expect everyone else to! Their driveway goes to cast, to the boundary. They didn't get an access permit for the west end of their property,because that road is not upgraded. Their access was and is to the boundary and again it seems they want it both ways! Why is that their driveway accessed the boundary,yet the address has always been Cone. Rd. 6, if it isn't a road?How long until the present owners want the rest of us to pick up the tab for upgrading and year round maintenance of our road,to their property edge?Their next door neighbours upgraded that same road to their driveway, at their expense,to get an access permit. A hundred years ago, none of our ancestors, in their wildest dreams could have forecast that which we take for common place today. What will the requirements of the municipality in regards to roads be in 25, 50 ...100 years?We can only guess, and likely not very well. I believe leaving this road open.is certainly sounder long term planning, than to even consider closing it. The cost in the future to put a road through utilizing the road allowance, clearing the forest, having environmental assessments and constructing the required bridges would be astronomical, by comparison to having to upgrade the forced road. I'm assuming a council of the future would probably view a closure now, as fiscally irresponsible, short sighted and putting the wants of a miniscule minority ahead of the long term best interests of the muniepality, and the community at large! From a historical perspective, we understand why the forced road was opened, and most importantly in the present, the residents continue to use this as a thoroughfare with very little cost having to be borne by the municipality. It seems the only costs are the annual grading, and cutting the roadside vegetation bi-annually. Thank you for your time. Are there any questions? 16-25 i We the undersigned would like the forced road at the eastern end of Conc. 6, in the former township of Clarke, to remain open for the use of the general public. This road was opened by the very early settlers of our township, and predates Confederation. 71e kr.514 UJI 4 � 10 ran OOPO Ta U4 Cis >�!' �671 u buffo 1 f nc 0 01 5 . �/���L'�#�� ���..t.�.� ./�/� 1 ��4�G� ��.� Iii�.£L���F1�t Ll�•1V}'1. W-+� ��� ., 16-26 4 l /,T ` Jt r �� 7,! AIO C. Own- 14on i 611 mo(c 06 I-Tb 16-27 Q11 6107 pe �aj'�fs 90h 8Z-91 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 TO REPORT LGL-0012-13 Presentation to Council Good evening, my name is Joseph Sinacori and I reside at 4855 Concession Road 6,Newtonville. On July 19,2013 the Mian's moved into the property at 4826 Concession Road 6. Prior to them arriving-some of the neighbours were already telling us that they were planning to close the section of Concession Road. 6,from their driveway to the East Townline Road. This had already. been tried by the previous owner, Mrs-. Ken 'Wright. She attempted to.block the road with a,couple of cedar logs, The Municipality was-called and-the.logs were quickly-removed. Mrs. Wright was informed that she could not block the road, Shortly after the Mian's moved in they posted signs indicating that the road would be blocked and gated by September 16, 2013. Please see the attached photos. Items number 1 & 2. We received a letter from their lawyer, Mark Woitzik, dated August 27, 2013, indicating all of the particulars and that the road would be permanently closed by Oct 1, 2013 and that we would have to incur the expense of installing our own access off of East Townline Road. Copy of this letter is attached. Item number.3 We considered this a very threatening letter and immediately contacted the Municipality and explained the details, Mr, Andrew C. Allison, the Municipal Solicitor responded to us in a letter and copied the Mian's and their Lawyer. The letter states as follows: Copy of this letter is also attached. Item number 4-A & 4 B. Re: 4826 Concession Road 6,Newtonville Our File No: L2030-07-04 An issue has arisen respecting this property. When a representative of the Municipality's Operation Department attempted to speak to the property owner on August 23, 2013, he was given your business card by Jo-Ann Mian and told that all future communications should be directed to you. The owner of this property [Peter A. Mian] has posted notices on either end of the property stating his intention to close and gate the "privately 16-29 owned road" that runs through it. ,A.picture of the notices is enclosed. Items number 1&2 I am writing to advise you that the "privately owned road" is in fact a forced road that has been in existence for more than 150 years. It has been maintained by the Municipality of Clarington, the Municipality of Port Hope and their predecessors for many decades. A portion of the road west of Fast Townline Road is winter maintained by Port Hope. The balance of the forced road is seasonally maintained by Clarington. A copy of a map from our internal GIS database showing the forced road and the surrounding property boundaries is enclosed for your reference. Item number 5. Also enclosed is a copy of a reference plan prepared in 1993 that clearly identifies the forced road. Items number 6 & 7. As you are likely aware, forced roads are common in Clarington and in many other areas of the Province. Paper title to a force road does not give the property owner the right to "close" or "gate" it, The portion of Concession Road 6 that runs through your client's property is a "highway" under the Municipal Act, 2001. Please be advised that if your client installs a gate, the Municipality will commence legal action to remove it. I would be pleased to discuss this matter with you at any time. Sincerely, Andrew C. Allison Municipal Solicitor cc. Fred Horvath, Director of Operations Peter A Mian From my knowledge of forced access roads and from what the Lawyer has confirmed they are open to all and are considered "highways". Historical fact states that this road has been open for over 150 years. It is also for farm-use. 16-30 One must also note that the hydra lines are this road and that Ontario Hydra needs access to these lines. I myself called Hydro a couple of years ago to remove a tree that had fallen on the lines. A few years ago during a rather harsh rain storm the culvert between our property and East Townline Road and a small portion of the road west of our driveway washed completely away. It was the Municipality that immediately came and repaired it. Trucks of all sorts have used this road to deliver services to our property and even the police have.driven down this road on their tours. There is another property between our property and the Mian's at 4870 that would be land locked if this road was to be blocked/gated. This property is owned,by Mr. Charles Ibbottson. I doubt that Mr. Ibbottson has,been notified about this issue since it would greatly affect his property. We have been given very little DUE NOTICE regarding this issue being put to Council with a possible motion to close the road. I was informed of this meeting and the issue of the Force Road on the agenda informally by Mr. Robert MacDonald who also found out informally. There was no DUE NOTICE of something of this importance. Voting to gate this highway would set a precedent all across Ontario where every farmer that has a forced road through his property could do likewise and then what would happen? I feel that this Council would leave itself open to many legal actions if it gated this road, I also feel that the Province and the Federal Government might have something to say about the Municipality gating a portion of legal highway on the request of one owner, I feel that Council would be going against the advice of its own lawyer if it allows this to occur. I would like to suggest that Council follow the advice of their Solicitor and cease any further action on this issue. 16-31. Another fact that I Was informed of is that any forced road that is over 10 years old automatically becomes permanent after this'period of time. Hence I fail to see why this issue is even before Council, ,Another fact is that the hydra lines run up this road. A present our mailing address is Concession Road.6 and our mail box is about 0.8 kilometers from our home. Is this Council going to change our direct route to our mail box and force us to go 10 kilometers to get our mail? Access to this road is the most direct route to my spouses' place of employment. I would like to suggest that it would be very impractical and unwise to allow this to happen and open this Pandora box. I have also enclosed a copy of part of the survey of the area in question, This survey is dated 1993. This survey indicates that this is a traveled road and that entrance to the property is on this road. There is also a question of policy of conveyance. When Mr, Wright built his home at 4826 he did not own the section of road that is in question. He informed me years ago that he bought it afterward. In closing I would Just like to say that I have consulted with the MPP, Mr, John O'Toole, regarding this issue and have also given him a copy of this presentation. Thank you for your time, .16-32 M `1•rp�•` � `..'�:�'.�'. -i ��a:`.+y•-':�t -:{.ry v;cy �( .Jt���. �,.i�.., -r r - i.. s '�ycr' ♦ij � ±�{ ti f• �.',�.•`.-!, t"�:r:�` ••y._� 5 C:' .'P:' 'b ;i: 'v 1:.•• r-- •ti., ' '�!• •k•..:.1� r�•1+`.3'•�"s }��f•s�1ai?f�C��c��y�F•S4';rl •�, ►: f�!! tr:_:11�'� 'k:�1:�'f .�i"'-•- '� � 'd-ti...'"�•:,v�f:1�;.�; •,L.'r:. i.: .,r,;,,._. -�•, - .1,, J'i •L..<...{; t�' .9•_. � �7 '.h. •ji: �.s � •;c .L�a.. may...1. :'�►:a7•::�.. •' �• S�t t ( 'd: _ .. •� :i�� -.�s.•�Z i9. .�?� .Sf.r. :1r,t ,.i.1�• (C: •��'ri� .�:1.��.t'`�^%L ' :.••j-,. ::�r rr�.!.,,a.y/f Ll r•! •' - 'tK..:•': + {�i:��-��i•r' .r •.c•..ae. �:G'?, V•\yyX? r^'r •' '. - r�_ y !. a•:���'::;. '±,Vii.:r'�i'' ..I�f�'.: , •.S" J/t•':y= � �.�• t t1`7.1:�-i ��a}s'�n'i -�. f+i..l�..-... t•:• ^•'•-�`•f.•?'�il .J: �',K.• .,( J�e.C.��,•r: :i;:�-• � •�� :y1.�'� .r..l•r��'•.•.'.. .iy: � y,l�w �v r k. il:� -{yY.. .t t (. r:. ; � 1. .� �/1'°�.: ;i: � r::..r�•.. .i d �t �d�.'•F ,y�f"v tAv lS`•.t• S:ii yi'r.rl_ •�`.. �b� k'�,• rl}•.J Y..ti•,i'$1:'S,• . �_.{f'1 �1�.�?` J.,.t. s :'�1 .t,. 't:�•'�i'��•� {,'1!:' 5.•��r}.,Q I �;y"-�11:' ,}SS`+�M.;"y'"" �'�•. `4� j.1-��;•7�' w �'�A..fr`r.: ty:ij`E'�., y�' YSsp:'' f�a� •�1 S 1S�'t,:; a ''J.`-::ar{ ;:'•�' ,,;;�s.;..�•.,. .,.t.. t4.�:• tvk�? C.�• �Y�•i. yr( S' r r�t� t4':-l�j� t+ Yti., e�� : 1;1•.: a'OrSi�:- ++.r:lC:,,,•.Y�. 'r'•' y -ti. ra�_a1r'�• r;�C;.,ro5.•y"'r,r•,_ t ♦1 .43: l:•CC�� u Y 1 � iti-•�w 'i -r-- .c•'J, :R. • tr t r: . �. t •�',`j sb.,r k '�'"�� ..•!`_. �a-.J'1 ry �J �y}��•II,M�'•S� 1 �T. -.1:.'y'hl a'•:..1•v.r.ti�.:l.•::C''�`�:�•:'+'%��'rQ•''i::•��fi'•"''�{. �F{'.t+�{.�••J�:? I-.r:'!� �J'i. y � < ` •,'N�-� !ry,�,,1 ��. w...v-:�;, ?P•.:�' r �1 y, � �- ,. {,�i.•11yu •x r' r �-•.t�i i. <•. :!,a.:. .:t,1'...�.r,1- �1=.�..::j,,.1. "'-� "+• . �rr yJt `a'�.. ••ter; •�� .a� r.r•..{r.' • hr ��' •a:� ar'd;l ��.• - ..',.-: `Et•r t� +. -:1•::C. �,- � ti �•>> .st' :�• �j r..r. S ti;�i�t �' n�1�a'r+.r'"•:':• :1- .-a- • �-{'..•' 4: i �! ;�''= +, v'x� �. V�i�.,r�:r�'.cn`.1._-.',-•i::•:• _a: :rtit..rir'•• ;L::+{'tr.r r4 � i�.. � 1E;'-at; ^ly w. �i?� - �fi•'{yi ''n.. }`l>S, , q !e, .,3` ?. �. �l= 1dt ;;, !y r/(.e � r - S':-.}1C- �-.f'�„•:y fi' s, .-.'ar A � iLY,f, ♦ t �'•—•:•.: •.1, .?rr• J•"•ti` 3 !7r •� •F rfcS7.[ .w•1 ,.. ;1� .� 5• �:•' ry:� s-.� .{. .� ,.:.t.'' ',.:'•�.r � _a`3�Cy .,,., � ^:1�' ��11,� Y:.::' :�- �v1•• ,e, o'e. •'£.,,..•�r,�r•_. a,Ci���,Yl�'1,�r!t,,:E�7i,; �rvi.' ,; :►r•• „mot ,'y,. i•1: •it .3..''•7•a`.r` '1 b,�• ory _ti :�+ �n rants�-• .:.� 'hr :i%: -J L i�l;f'i;�' ;ti;•>,�iic•, cH.!':".:cr S...ti�:?;i •:. .•r ;,Ji a.•rth.'%' r' �,d �l t �-. r ,.:•`...• -� ,,,,i 1 r } • L. "� -,• � 1.F 1 1)''; `7.i, i�,�y 4.,�, i. � f• 7r .�� jl;• `.��Y _r� ,v..••, 1 ;i `s _ :�Ja,,1r !. .i.: ti?;c:. ;�:� ♦, r r.. 'Y� ,a t..s yi!'�� 1S•• �►-(� .!r 2 ra:Z. ,r .�• r ra•� �'•�t d:� 'F,,,�rr � L G� �., h`]�".3• t r' �K. 'i<;• T ?:: .1 it .'r'. "4'.• `�' fit. N.• } J �iatl' ;�; % ,� >h' y, 3` %•:';,.� .} '� c.•,„�;�• ��..ti5•ii '�� ^t.;.: ! r'a7• '��:''r-•::R..a"• S,Sy�=��;i. .r_ �Y�, a :N M_.rr)/I:�a•R5. y�..'�• Y ��.tt���• �l`a:yr'�j,s�i f����(.�F•_L�,�., �"_eS:i4. _lfn t•r:�y, r t".�r•.:f��-ti:a .G.;1,�.,•`�L •r•S'•` y`�$r� :f � .,!� •••p53•i, ^, _fit. .'•�'' `" i'�7r, d z?. � - ..?' J .r 1S i' �- ti,l�, ° �.. .;i'.-'. psrr .� �. y_ •y. r,ri,•►= r.\ +�.•�,''�''._c?�s1: to., r� .:fs: '1• 1 ��- �; ir,• .f;e.- .}i•+... r,�? F 1 %•"..• '...{ + -•,'t�-,:�•?c,�a• t.� �-` -.,'y` 1 < rY: ��• 1r.A�y :r....+. }�:}.• '•��_r l..�. 1 �_.l:?:.:7�A`,�j%}4•� �... '-•+ T:+SC?_'• •yr-�_ �. �ar`�'�S j,'J�� t�{y�w� = .� 1:+'.��. ,r• fr;�-1 ri: i r• •:4:• . +. �`� ��.. .,.,. � � �/ '}�'�r.y S�.:7y;•.�.: it•' L .s.fe• ,.�:...t •xn r...:r 3:$:/.' .t.�`•.,�. ,,�rf�r•4 F�`=: t.`�.1}.• �`t -�:4��... t�'S"t l,.'av�lck'��•'J?-�.•giC}t:`:•�':}Yh � �'¢y �y�;•q�N• ,�.F��G=S.'r�.3 +ea�• } `ray;i-• l i.r �J;.. ! 1 Y 6 �j�_r�rrYlr r �:t' r• ar��y��itiY a... §al um, 4�- 1.� 7�1 VM♦ ga-6 4`1�7' 11 IS I. 1,rl��-- 7iAl ..715 'T P'N `r O PON'-o'l-sg Q F 1:: ZF,: -L tz C. v a, L.,• r N 'A `J .03 rif,P.1. 1 1 1,tit 1:uu1, LIN'-*:T? T 05-668.44H6 BARRISTER & SOLICITOR t �Ki•i�ib5.9"�" August 27, 20 1'3 Vida Vaitiekunns 4855 Concession Rand G Newton vi l le.Onturio I-DA,I JO if'irlin��l��rrJar/Jc�c• Ek-Ar Ms Vaitickunas: Rc: Peter Andrew Mian Jo-Ann N-1ian 4826 Concession 6 Rood. Newcastle. Ontario) UJA IJO Please be advised that I represettt fetes Androw Mian tuul JO-Atm Miun,the omm s of ,1826 Conix.ssion G Road, NcwcaStic,Ontario LOA 1J0, 1 understand that you havu bccn accessing your 1>tr)N-rty aver n private:road owned by myclient~. The title"'equc))confirms that you do not have a ri&-c)kvay over my clients property. I liirtltcr understand thrtt the priviuus omicrs advised you that at some ix)Int this road pu currently have been using %vould be closed and you would be required to incur the expem of iustalling your own acoq.9s to 7'ownline Road, Be advised that efrective September 15, 201.1,tltc roast will be gal d on(I your zeros will be ltrt iW to Townline Road. l:tllmivc,()ct Nr 1, 2013.my clients will be closing that private rumd pt:rmunetttly kind your access will no longcr ltc:jvmitted, Any acccsc over this t)dad Miter Ooober 1, 201 t will be considered tre.gpass+ing. , Y unk Very truly, ,F rt 'Stitl.ik v.WW.r3UR taMt,nWYCR,ca 16-35 1 (tq rfic 1<�ct� 1 Try Aup :21,2013 ftristertJrtti Micky :r00 Brock 3tma$ourh Vrltitby,t�it:atir • LW 412. Dm Sir. RE, 4826 C.nnaeMon Road G.NowWA4iile Out,1-W NO:12tISt1�Q?-�4 r1�i�su. �ri�n res�otina this pvp�ty, vl ham:C:iwpn:�:aa�tiva hf-th�:��n:aj�lity`s Opzt• 1,10M DcPm m0nt:httemptad;a sp04L to the lualretty 0v4uar on AvpST?3.2013.Fie urea W%-m,-ourbtsirlm ca, k; y Jo-.inn,fisnand.told 111,1t all future o7n�►nuriasti,�r,� S�scJtt E+c kx omgroftft;s'•p-,pyorV(ptcr.A.Mead)hag pcktM•notim on oddity end of tips prupwly stating his iMe-tiM to Closa and Pte the owned road"that mywt 6aough it. A picture of the rinttccs is cnc:oxmi I nm w.ttuv to rnlviso you that the"Imixi-xaiy owned swd"is in Imt a fmad road that has lea ' ki UineftO kr mom than ISO Yaars. it has hoer:ms'ati d l y the(v1tvJcipallty ofpW4Sw0, 4; the Muuitipalit r of Part kid imd;hc k pr docvemc) c for mazy dcmos, A porton of the triad 'AVA Of EA9� 11irt0 RM is Wins:rcS:Mt md 0,fort HoFa Tho tsai -1 of C( d s���4 Is sMonallY teia.9nloicta4 by Mu ittator,. ,A,copy ofa map fxnm"itttemal GIS databose Sl'.4tt'ing the forcod twA W the surrotutding pro Nrty bnunduaies is caclosad or you sti:;a,entm, Xw tmolowd Ls a Copy of a refer p)sA preppy d in 1593 that alwly idertifj w Cho bccd marl . As You 9k1.'Rely$tom,foTCod!oadx m CQLti77 oa in Claringob and in talmy(tj--ja was or th4 P:aviace- ?r)rpa title to a farted rot d riots not skive the pmpa"umtcr the f*t to"close"a. '-8rta"it. Tho portion�ai'C:imt. ss!on Road's tltst rt;:iS tlmvu;;h you clictu's property ig s "Ughwar undax the.,Vrirt cfpal,,'cr,2001. Ptwse be ad vtood tl=ifyouT climt dusts a 00, the.muniripality will rommvmvo I%W action to remove it. CORPORATION OF ME MUVICIPALIT'Y OF CLARMOTOM 4C IEMPERANL`k STR4RT. ROWMANVI.:.L, ONTARIO 1.10 SAO T 906•62;�43.19 8 tetteato Ma*Woitfk•august z7M13 Pa2e I woula'e pleasd co dis=s this umit4r with YOU as any ter, IL s;n�rcly. 11 l� Anttr�v►G.Allison 6; .itmtclga!wb`ci•.jr ac. FtedHn»�ts�.Dira�r�!'O�axeciar.� Few A..Wi q 16-37 r. s i l t 571 Ft Qi 1 1 i r 242 SIVA i 16-38 �� rn M 1 UWC— I ({ a Ij m.I r, r.n.ae _.. -„'" � Ao6 R.aw.fr il.rar Cw>rr1x.��-•_- __..rte ��1 "" ��-� . a+sa ��yaa o I •` w[ r l.Ji 7f AEIVI M:cif it fCf C• . z4.4•csaarr,c. '�� - ; [RYl�)7f�lF�s•tlat+„kY iiPYi 1 `'� •�_ �#,fir ' �� tif.s f sat• w-."4 .Mr+4tir..•l aiw*!tf ww.i. 'y�� � � �wrir��r�i.wu�� � I ra ; �1 N1►v va..,A • � �f MrMUSw Y4 f h a. _ .. � „y Y[r..wi.t�Yr+ f tii0Ul1,9r� �►�il"ii�/ :ra «.Y?!4�/f ..r��ur,,"•t��.��"]� � 'f - ry ias�c �`:c':t�; •: �.. :fStQ °Z.91 CO'14�6� ��Ta'+4£•NI OK .��'-£o� �r (• 4!r l3! OA! + 98 Af J �,•; : Of h off.cf,= 8 , td £1.827 an u01+fc^..$�J 4J1 _ L a $t` IN r£L 6ZI M.,�C7£,f�£p897d Y 0; ! Cr"4D ?MQ tVO t�3�ra m N34 3�ldi` 5 b� r,eC9Oalr6! f l%��iT:' crA.r',. ^CJ�7 N or 341 IV it Jn r � g • J "_ - R l•' 744/06• y., �- C'�,�:' ;x•.�- r. ..gr . .ors!-� �y�. IS �•'�..• 'armFwilr.wr•ww4 _ - ::! .,!T�^ . 1Mr *',Y```,i. F!.RaM,•'_,�....`r+�+�•o!+n�.n�uww'.rwnwxi.sr;,.'�`!"�!.�.n!i+r4wlnh�:r:.•..rwrni .,m,rn,+;.;�.�w�++<anwa n..r*:�...aan.o.n.r.�.+.�-�.+...,w,,.^^"'+..wr�iPd f'••• f. f _ 4 • • IQ Gilmore Road Aj 111. [� _ � '� r M•'y,'1.< S� ,n- `rt r { (: -y �t1. Y ` T ,y J IIII 9 •• • li. 1 ' r, !f��t rt.� •�t..a.� s o L' Ow �Af;. �� i�c. f. �'�'ttLt `'/ r '�.,'"'•I R 3- v�� j_ �R .'!d�d f rttt���t/ yi.y • tir, ,a!�`' !t •r fS�f�L+�l r\-� 1 6{ ' • 4 ♦ L t 1.. yr ,t.t4;f i ,�. �1. �q�+�,�,, V � , � '; � � •" �': d 1 ;t �'4 t!'>t{fi).�Ir { `.`l - r �� h ••�'S'� 1�.�,t1f.��: � 3�(„� Z 3;i'.(Q \.�� �•ti`. L�`G.; � —L Clarington REPORT CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution #: By-law#: Report#: CAO-011-13 File #: Subject: SUSTAINABILE CLARINGTON COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION #1 FOLLOW-UP RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report CAO-011-13 be received for information. Submitted by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CC;FW CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 17-1 REPORT NO.: CAO- 011-13 PAGE 2 1. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to respond to Council's direction on the matter of reporting on what would be involved in enabling Clarington residents and businesses to easily be aware of and locate information on living and doing business in sustainable ways. 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 In its November 4th report, the Sustainable Clarington Community Advisory Committee (SCCAC) recommended (Recommendation #1) that "Council provide sufficient funding and staff to enable the Municipality's communications staff to work with Regional Communications staff and with all the different community organizations that can contribute here so that Clarington residents and business can, within the next 12 months, easily be aware of and locate information on living and doing business in more sustainable ways and on the range of initiatives the Municipality is undertaking to demonstrate leadership in sustainability and each can easily contribute their own ideas." 2.2 At its November 18th Council meeting, Resolution #GPA-547-13 was approved. It provided that in the case of recommendation #1 that "staff be requested to report to Council on: (a) how to achieve the outcomes set out in recommendation 1 (b) the costs to do this and (c) how the costs would be distributed; that such staff report be provided before the end of December, 2013 so that Council may consider this matter in the 2014 budget deliberations." 3. COMMENTS 3.1 The Sustainability Committee made it clear in its report that it is not looking for existing programs to be expanded. Rather they are only looking for existing programs to be better communicated in order to reach a clear outcome: within 12 months residents and business can easily: • be aware of and locate information on living and doing business in more sustainable ways • be aware of the range of initiatives the Municipality is undertaking to demonstrate leadership in sustainability • contribute their own ideas. 3.2 Staff have assessed how to achieve the outcomes recommended and conclude that the key communications actions include: 17-2 REPORT NO.: CAO- 011-13 PAGE 3 - gather and inventory communications about the range of programs and services available to residents and businesses from sources such as the Region of Durham, Veridian, Hydro One, the conservation authorities and community organizations - place this inventory in an accessible manner on the Municipality's website - anticipate and address issues that may arise with providing this type of information on the Municipality's website, e.g., protection of privacy, ensuring a level playing field for commercial firms providing products or services in this area, keeping the information up to date - create an internal means to collect and communicate information from Municipal Departments on initiatives the Municipality is undertaking to demonstrate leadership in sustainability - create a means by which residents and businesses can contribute their own suggestions about programs and services to this inventory. 3.3 While the time frames available have not permitted detailed project planning, Staff believe that these activities while significant, can be initially accommodated within the proposed 2014 Budget of the Communications and Tourism Division and that the outcomes listed above can largely met within the 12 month time frame set by the Committee. Should more detailed project planning reveal that additional resources would be required, then the project would be scoped to work within the 2014 resources and funding sought to complete the full scope in the 2015 Budget. 4. CONCLUSION 4.1 Communicating to Clarington residents and business what programs and services are available to live and do business in sustainable ways is important. This outcome, early analysis shows, should be able to be largely accomplished within existing resources. It will get underway in the new year so this outcome can be achieved, as recommended by the Sustainable Clarington Community Advisory Committee, within one year. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN —The recommendations contained in this report conform to the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability X Connecting Clarington X Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure X Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Curry Clifford, MPA, CMO, Corporate Initiatives Officer 17-3 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 18 a ciff-mgmn R E Or%0 RT - COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: October 28, 2013 Resolution#: 610,q,,5V5'13 By-law#: N/A Report#: CSD-010-13 File#: Subject: CLARINGTON FITNESS CENTRE — PROPOSED RENOVATION RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CSD-010-13-be received; 2. THAT Council approve the Basic Amenities Option at a preliminary construction budget of $2,850,000; 3. THAT the growth related portion be financed from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund in the amount of $508,000; 4. THAT the balance of financing of $2,342,000 is recommended to be financed from the following sources: Community Services Capital Reserve Fund $48,000 (unspent 2013 design budget) Community Services Capital Reserve Fund $400,000 Community Services Building Refurbishment Reserve Fund $200,000 Impact/Escrow Reserve Fund $600,000 Municipal Government Enterprise Reserve Fund $500,000, and General Municipal Purposes Reserve Fund $594,000; 5. THAT to the extent possible in the future, the financing of $508,000 from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund be repaid from future collections of the Indoor Recreation component of the Development Charges; and 6. THAT all interested parties listed in the report be advised of Council's decision. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 18-1 Clarington. REPORT COMMUNITY VI DEPARTMENT Reviewed by: Submitted by: 4b/se'ph P. Caruana Franklin Wu, Director, Community Chief Administrative Officer Services JPC/ga CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 18-2 REPORT NO.: CSD-010-13 PAGE 3 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The Clarington Fitness Centre (CFC) was opened to the public in 1981 and has served the community very well since that time. During this current term of Council, staff has advised of various issues related to the aging of the facility, outdated amenities and implications resulting from recent accessibility legislation. 1.2 As part of the Community Services Department's ongoing preventative maintenance program, building profiles are conducted every five years on each of our recreation facilities. These profiles provide staff with the technical information required to develop our capital maintenance programs. In addition to the building profiles, the Department conducts accessibility audits on all recreation facilities, enabling staff to strategically address upgrades leading up to 2025 when the legislation requires that all our facilities must be fully accessible. 1.3 A Building Condition Assessment was completed by Algal Engineering in August of 2012 and the Barrier Removal Action Plan was completed by SPH Planning and Consulting in January of 2012. The recommendations provided in each of these studies form the basis of the schedule of improvements required to keep the facility performing at current standards while addressing legislated requirements for a fully accessible facility. 1.4 As the project evolved, staff also identified operational and programming constraints of the facility with the intention of providing a facility that meets the standards that our patrons have come to expect at our Municipal recreation facilities. 2.0 PUBLIC MEETING PROCESS 2.1 Whether we are contemplating construction of a new facility or renovating an existing facility, it is important that our community partners are involved with the planning process. For this project, meetings were held with our major facility users; the Clarington Swim Club, the Clarington Squash Club, and the aquafit and lane swim participants. In addition, two separate general public meetings were held where input for the project was received and considered by staff. 2.2 The Swim Club, lane swimmers and aquafit participants were quite clear in their desire to not alter the depth of the shallow end of the pool. The Swim Club and their members were very concerned that any change to the depth or structure of the pool would not allow the Club to sanction its swim meets and would hamper the growth of the Club. 2.3 The Squash Club expressed that their membership had experienced growth, particularly over the past two years, and that growth had warranted the addition of at least one and preferably two additional new squash courts to the facility. 18-3 REPORT NO.: CSD-010-13 PAGE 4 2.4 With the information gained at the initial stakeholder meetings, staff and the architects developed three concept options for consideration. Each of the options showed no changes to the depth of the shallow end of the pool or the pool structure itself. 2.5 A final public meeting was held with all stakeholders and the general public on September 5, 2013. Each of the concept options were displayed and staff, along with the consultants, were available to answer questions and take comments regarding each of the options, 2.6 Although each option has merit, there was no really clear preference from those in attendance as to which option was preferable. Of the 29 comment forms received, 14 favoured the teaching pool and squash option, 12 preferred the squash only option, while two preferred to upgrade the existing facility and one preferred the teaching pool design. 3.0 DESIGN OPTIONS 3.1 Each of the preliminary design options include the same upgrades to the facility components and amenities. These are referred to as the Project Components (Attachment 1) and are required as a result of the previously mentioned studies to extend the operational life of the facility, to make the facility compliant with accessibility (barrier free) legislation and to modernize the facility to today's standards. 3.2 Teaching Pool Expansion 3.2.1 This option (Attachment 2) provides a new teaching pool to be added adjacent to the south wall of the existing facility, new public viewing areas, improved service and reception and brings natural light into the pool area. The preliminary project budget for this option is estimated at approximately $4,400,000. 3.3 Squash Court Expansion 3.3.1 This option (Attachment 3) provides one additional squash court to be added to the north side of the facility, squash spectator viewing, improved pool viewing at upper level, improved service and reception. The preliminary project budget for this option is estimated at approximately $4,200,000. 3.4 Teaching Pool and Squash Court Expansion 3.4.1 This option (Attachment 4) is a combination of previous options and provides for an additional squash court, new teaching pool, improved public viewing (pool and squash), improved services and reception and also brings natural light into the pool area. The preliminary budget for this option is estimated at approximately $5,400,000. 18-4 REPORT NO.: CSD-010-13 PAGE 5 4.0 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 The Clarington Swim Club has experienced positive growth, particularly over the last two years. The Club's 2012-2013 membership is comprised of 54 competitive swimmers, 197 non-competitive swimmers and 71 masters for a total membership of 322 members. Staff is supportive of this organization and as such agree with the Club's position that altering the shallow end of the pool could be detrimental to the Club's future. 4.2 The Clarington Squash Club is a new Club with a history of a committed group of squash players. Working with Department staff this Club has recently adopted a constitution and is now operating as a not-for-profit organization with a membership base. Although the Club has experienced some growth, their membership numbers of 64 members do not support the addition of new facilities at this time. 4.3 In researching the standard ratio of members to court availability staff contacted Squash Ontario, who referred us to a squash consultant with Advantage Sport who advises that the industry benchmark suggests each court should accommodate 70 players. 4.4 As a result, it is staff's position that the existing two courts are adequate in terms of their current membership numbers while still providing for future growth of the sport and membership base. Staff does not support the Squash Club position that they require two new squash courts. There is room for the Club to operate with current membership numbers and also provide opportunity for growth with the existing two courts. 4.5 Department staff has reviewed the recent growth patterns for primarily pre-school aged aquatic programs (six months to six years). Based on information gathered from previous registrations as well as Community Forecast Projections as prepared by Hemson Consulting Ltd., it is our position that at the current projected rate of growth, staff can continue to accommodate new participants in the pre-school aquatic programs at both the Courtice Community Complex and Newcastle & District Recreation Complex in the short to medium time frame (three to five years). 4.6 That being said, as programs and pool space approach capacity the choice of day or time for available lessons will decrease. Beyond the five year window capacity could likely still be made available but may impact time currently utilized by other pool users. For example, public swim time converted to an instructional time. 18-5 REPORT NO.: CSD-010-13 PAGE 6 5.0 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 After careful consideration of the community consultation process, our staff project team is recommending a fourth option referred to as the Basic Amenities Option (Attachment 5) for the consideration of Council. This option encompasses the original intent of the project excluding any features that would alter the structure or depth of the existing pool. 5.2 The Basic Amenities Option accommodates a work program that accomplishes the majority of upgrades represented by the project components. Specifically it provides for replacement of the facility's major operating systems, improved public viewing, the addition of a family change room, lighting improvements, washroom, change room and overall facility upgrades, and would address barrier free accessibility. The preliminary project budget for this option is estimated at $3,052,000. 6.0 PROJECT BUDGET/SCHEDULE 6.1 The proposed project budget is as follows; Construction $2,500,000 Contingency $ 250,000 Equipment and Furnishings $ 100,000 Architectural Fees (Previously Approved) $ 202,000 Total Project Estimate $3,052,000 6.2 Staff has prepared a revised project schedule as follows; Project Report to GPA October 28, 2013 Ratification — Council November 4, 2013 Tender Award to GPA February 17, 2014 Ratification — Council February 24, 2014 Building Closes to Public March 11, 2014 Construction March —December, 2014 Building Re-opening December 2014/January 2015 7.0 PROJECT FINANCING 7.1 The upgrades and renovations to the Clarington Fitness Centre are primarily non- growth related due to the bulk of the work revolving around the existing facility. However, there are added features such as the addition of a family change room that would qualify as expansion to the facility. The expanded square footage totals 2,500 square feet or 16.7%. This equates to approximately $508,000 that would be eligible for funding from the Indoor Recreation Development Charges Reserve Fund. As Council is aware, this reserve fund is currently deficient due to 18-6 REPORT NO.: CSD-010-13 PAGE 7 the slower than anticipated growth in units over the time frame of the current and previous by-law. As a result it is recommended that the growth component be financed from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund with the proviso that should it be possible in the future, the $508,000 would be repaid from the Indoor Recreation component of the Development Charges collections. 7.2 The balance of financing of $2,342,000 is recommended to be financed from the following sources: Community Services Capital Reserve Fund $48,000 (unspent 2013 design budget) Community Services Capital Reserve Fund $400,000 Community Services Building Refurbishment Reserve Fund $200,000 Impact/Escrow Reserve Fund $600,000 Municipal Government Enterprise Reserve Fund $500,000 General Municipal Purposes Reserve Fund $594,000 7.3 A number of reserve funds have been recommended in order to spread the impact of the required funding across the reserve funds as long term asset management strategies will be considered in the future that will rely upon reserve funds for sources of funding. Should Council wish to proceed with other than the recommended option, consideration would have to be given to debenture financing rather than reserve fund financing due to the impact upon reserve fund balances that are needed for future long term asset management purposes. 7.4 Debenture financing was considered for this project due to currently favourable financing rates. However, as the project is primarily replacement, not growth, as referenced above, repayment would have to be financed from tax levy in future years. 8.0 COMMENTS 8.1 Staff is confident that the recommended option will allow the Clarington Fitness Centre to serve our community for years to come. When completed, the facility will have added a new elevator, new customer service/reception area and other upgrades, to make the facility fully accessible. 8.2 The addition of a family change room, second floor meeting space, new filtration and mechanical systems, and an overall facelift for the building components will improve our energy consumption and make the facility a more welcoming environment that supports our patron's expectations. 8.3 If approved, it is estimated that the upgrade will add a minimum of 15 years to the normal lifespan of the facility. 18-7 REPORT NO.: CSD-010-13 PAGE 8 9.0 CONCURRENCE This report has been reviewed by Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance, who concurs with the recommendations. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN – The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: _ Promoting economic development — Maintaining financial stability _ Connecting Clarington _ Promoting green initiatives X Investing in infrastructure _ Showcasing our community _ Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Joseph P. Caruana, Director of Community Services Attachments: Attachment 1 – Project Components Attachment 2 - Teaching Pool Expansion Option Attachment 3 - Squash Court Expansion Option Attachment 4 - Teaching Pool and Squash Court Expansion Option Attachment 5 - Basic Amenities Option List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Clarington Squash Club Clarington Swim Club 18-8 Attachment 1 to Report CSD-010-13 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CLARINGTON FITNESS CENTRE RENOVATION Project Comporients • Barrier free accessibility • Elevator to second floor • Public washroom upgrades (2nd floor) • Family change room with private cubicles and accessible change areas • Pool deck tile replacement • Main pool finishes upgrades Improved finishes throughout public areas • Upgrade pool filtration equipment • Upgrade HVAC systems and controls • Pool dehumidification/improved air quality • Lighting improvements • Improved security and communications systems • Designated substances removal • Separate building fire alarm system from high school • Improved viewing • Service access to squash courts • Replace existing roof • Plumbing fixture replacement • Locker improvements • Additional power outlets at pool deck level • Additional power outlets at change rooms 18_9 Attachment 2 to Report CSD-01013 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CLARINGTON FITNESS CENTRE RENOVATION Teaching Pool Expansion Option • Tot/Teaching Pool with ramped access and family viewing court • Improved pool viewing at lower and upper levels • Men's &Women's change room upgrades • Improved service and reception area • Improved entrance and way-finding • Improved lifeguard station and change facilities • Natural lighting to pool area • New hot tub • New sauna • Barrier free family washroom • Increased pool storage space 18-10 f TEACHNG POOL EXPAN&ON Department Legend SORT'S' ❑EvG4tq C� ❑NON EXISTING 2 STOREY SCHOOL i Rr�ARD �� D © PARKWD k� O 6 . _ Im.Faron; wnavwK "'I :� ScIEWILLH Cl y R.PA— ' O ^ PARK—EMICLe O.F PARKN� OF E%5TN0 CQ:C y Q BY.7VAC E. otA I P AWOAOO _ 2 / nr NEW Wi10OW4 PROXCT: t B.FPARKNO ClaringtonFitness D Centre 40 LIBERTY ST NORTH '1 I OBit1NEOf EYJSTNG BU IOI.VG EOGE ' CLAWNGTON F CLAR:NGTON mr _ OBSERVING -_ ronra —.m, : � V GROUND FLOOR __ ______ WINDOW 17 O ADDMON ADDITION D — O rl Level., =�-- y3oeo A701 C/) D j fl 0 CD j �► W OD I Goy RppFBELOw l i o� ' µwEOOS,Np wNpows ,nwER ro FLOOR ECOEOFEASTNp BUIDI.�O �Tuo1NOROiw (1� 0 O 4 NEW WNDOWS � PR(}IECT: ��� Clarington Fitness Centre ROGF BFi Ow� I. I <p LIBERTY ST NORTH i WN'C:PALRV OF CLAR:NGTCN SECOND FLOOR ROOF BELOW 1 CD .. �. J o �'•`—.�� I � LEI .--t I N L ,Nm _ o rl Level 2 ULM �A102 (n O O W Attachment 3 to Report CSD-010-13 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CLARINGTON FITNESS CENTRE RENOVATION Squash Court Expansion Option • Additional squash court • Squash court spectator viewing area ® Improved pool viewing at upper level • Men's & Women's change room upgrades • Improved service and reception area • Improved entrance and way-finding • Improved lifeguard station and change facilities • New hot tub • New sauna • Barrier free family washroom 18-13 00 .L SQUASH COURT El"11KPANSION Department Legend �OQTL. EjExIL',h0 •' ❑Nov. I EXISTING 2 STOREY SCHOOL I I �tMq uon ours i O �•'ro L�� PMIONO I HH i I ' fYni WPaY1K1auM�rui a I ;r O� � °"1O BP PPRKWG LIFE ® f� c— Q' r'�}IY"^'c lu I' I PPWECf: CC�CgS—�J W—MG Clarington FRness mm4 Centre D a I 49 LIBERTY ST NORTH 0 EOFE=r.G I 9UIILttIG EDGE CLARIN TON OF SL1 ® � I CLARINGTON � OMN'TG GROUND FLOOR ... ..� W iC O ADDITION. CD rl Level 1 8 13geo �A101 n O O W I I i I RaaFO[i.Gw reuw w6AiI . 0 0 o o MMEF%iSiNG WNGGWS IDWER TG FLDDR wRnVG NOR Q fLGEGF EIOSiNG BUIDNG N[W WNGONS ViW IECT: Clarington Fitness �nooFeeow\ .© Centre C LIBERTY STNORTH D MUNICIPALRYOF 9 CLARWGTON C7 GruwNC: � O SECOND FLOOR CD I� mews O _ T CD �1 LOVCI P _. 0 I3'm0 �A102 C7 co co � I O I o I V 1 W Attachment 4 to Report CSD-010-13 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CLARINGTON FITNESS CENTRE RENOVATION Teaching Pool and Tot Pool Expansion Option • Tot/Teaching pool with ramped access and family viewing court • Additional squash court • Squash court spectator viewing area • Improved pool viewing at lower and upper levels • Men's &Women's change room upgrades • Improved service and reception area • Improved entrance and way-finding • Improved lifeguard station and change facilities • Natural lighting to pool area • New hot tub • New sauna • Barrier free family washroom • Increased pool storage space 18-16 TEACH D G POOL SQUASH COURT E�PAN&0N Department Legend �ORTy ❑Evc6nD NeV EXISTING 2 STOREY SCHOOL I PARKNG �wC I P D P� gg O � S SOEWAUC 0 .� Sarn4.eno. I O �w RENWCPARTS �' d PMMNG PEWCLD OF PMKNG UFB GF E%ISTING C C N C �_ BV 67 SPACE O` GUARD PMELS MDADD _ a O f NEW WRIDONS wvv 9IFFAMWG Clarington Fitness Centre SU OF 49 USERTY ST NORTH I I I OUTLNE [ltiSTNG � n ypplr�G , BULDNG EDGE MUNICIPALITY OF D CLARINGTON I WINDOW OBSERVING faruca DRAWING WINDO- �• OBSERVING GROUND FLOOR _________ __ ___________ WINDOW _ CD AMMON ADDITION 7C3 G I Level 1 13080 A101 CD OD O J oa - --- - - - 1 . I i I i i BMAN'ALLE SECONDARY SCNDOL m r�c�amu i [�] _ _ I I _ I I flOOFSELON ® !I I ICI I I / I I aNVSauaacouar I I r I �^. I _ I I I I LOWER WNOOWS IER T TO O FLOCfl O�raa E%SiNp I I I cw I BL'AlDNO I I I I I I I I I NEWWNIDONS I I I I I MWECT. L------------------ �.;, Clarington Fitness D Centre If -�FAOFeEWw 9 L SERTY'ST NORTH \\\1 ® MUNICIPALnYOF 0 CLARINGTON ® OMNnNG: 3 SECOND FLOOR (D HOOF 6ElON\ �h 1 ® O 61aaY Uar4r (D uurilwmn O awnrwv. 1 Level 2 6 13080 A102 I O O W Attachment 5 to Report CSD-010-13 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CLARINGTON FITNESS CENTRE RENOVATION Basic Amenities Option • Barrier free accessibility • Elevator to second floor • Public washroom upgrades (2nd floor) • Family change room with private cubicles and accessible change areas • Staff change rooms • Pool deck tile replacement • Main pool finishes upgrades • Improved finishes throughout public areas • Upgrade pool filtration equipment • Upgrade HVAC systems and controls • Pool dehumidification/improved air quality • Lighting improvements • Improved security and communications systems • Renovation of existing men's and women's change rooms • Designated substances removal • Improved viewing • Plumbing fixture replacement • Additional power outlets at pool deck level • Additional power outlets at change rooms 18-19 OD NO 0 —Ts W Basic Amenotocs Option Department Legend Exi0M I FIN- EXISTING 2 STOREY SCHOOL emrmcxnwaeA 1111 �� evmNC�NicN CUPra .,eao.�nr EdN�,vm �1 o Cl f WWNG Eq p � lNe GuN R w0lMI - PNOICCi: WF PM-3 Clarington Fitness 1 NEW OBSEA Cent D WN v it 1111 ERTYSTNORTH _ --�.,aynoxsi OImINE Of-VM &AIDING^••E MUNICIPALnYOF d}+rr+ csvrion 101p�' CU1R(NOTON (� v°°"` paww¢ ZT Bask AmorY'ie.00SOn INnwwnmwb mCNw adslFq tlooro I' 'ADDITION ,0 rl Le e 1 v vrm 13080 �A701 O O W ILBJ'asoc Amen tbs Opt on I i 07 . ._... F.tlinpN�duHOlhxn \R60FBECOW c�c�ecF CwsTeiG �° � ^I Clti�— I ' NEW WWGOWB PROJCCT: Clarington Fitness NGOF BELOW\ _� —` Centre \\\ L= 40LIBERTYSTNORTH _ ��r MUNIOIPALRYOF rw,w�roou CLARINGTON I (7 ® —WMG. SECOND FLOOR Beale A-69.OpEan — CSl I � I T I Leve;2 O — 13080 �A102 C7 � O N l W Unfinished Business 18 b Leading the Way RMPORT PLANNING SERVICES PART TENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 9, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: Addendum to File#: S-C-2007-0002 & 40M-2419 PS D-072-13 Subject: NOISE FENCE FOR LOTS ON WEST SIDE OF VIVIAN DRIVE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Addendum to Report PSD-072-13 be received; and 2 THAT all interested parties listed in Addendum to Report PSD-072-13 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: David . Crome, MCIP, RPP Ir Wu, Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer 3 December 2013 CP/df CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40EMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 18-22 ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO.: PSD-072-13 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 At the November 25, 2103 General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting, Committee considered Report PSD-072-13 and passed the following resolution: "THAT Report PSD-072-13, regarding a Noise Fence for Lots on the west side of Vivian Drive, be referred to Staff to meet with the developer to discuss the situation." 2. DISCUSSIONS WITH MR. HALMINEN 2.1 Staff met with Mr. Hannu Halminen the president of Halminen Homes who was the builder of the dwellings within 40M-2419, Vivian Drive. During the meeting Mr. Halminen advised that after reviewing PSD-072-13 it appears Mr. Franklin's key issue is noise level in his rear yard; Mr. Halminen also raised the following points during the meeting: i. Report PSD-072-13 incorrectly referred to Section 4.12 (21) of the subdivision agreement as a 'warning' clause. This section of the agreement requires the Owner through the Purchase and Sale Agreement 'advise' homeowners that in order to achieve acceptable noise attenuation levels between 55 and 60 dBA, the outdoor amenity area for lots 1 — 13 is located in the front yard and/or veranda of the dwelling; ii. the purchase and sale agreement contained a warning to purchasers that sound levels due to increasing road traffic may occasionally interfere with some of the activities of the dwelling occupants as sound levels exceed the Ministry of Environment criteria. (Attachment 4 to PSD-072-13); iii. that although, the advisory note regarding outdoor amenity area for lots 1 to 13 being located in the front yard and/or veranda of the dwelling was not in the purchase and sale agreement, it was specifically reviewed at the preconstruction meeting. Each purchaser was provided a plan of their lot with a location of the dwelling and the outdoor amenity area identified on the plan. (Attachment 4 to PSD-072-13); and iv. that as per the purchase and sale agreement, all purchasers had opportunity for their lawyer to review the purchase and sale agreement, as well as the subdivision agreement registered on title, and that any purchaser who did not want to proceed with the deal because of the outdoor amenity area, or any other reason, has never been forced to continue with the purchase. 2.2 In response to questions from staff, Mr. Halminen advised he would not pay for a noise fence to be constructed along the Trulls Road frontage of the subject lots. Similarly he advised he would not contribute financially to the construction of a noise,fence. In his view, all purchasers were fully informed that noise levels may exceed MOE guidelines for lots 1 to 13. 18-23 ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO.: PSD-072-13 PAGE 3 3. STAFF COMMENTS 3.1 Report PSD-072-13 was prepared as a result of Mr. Franklin's letter to Council which contained a petition from the residents of lots 1 to 13. No correspondence or calls have been received from other residents. Mr. Franklin did not include any documents with respect to the purchase agreement with his submission. 3.2 As part of the subdivision agreement for the development of Vivian Drive and associated lots, there was no security posted for the construction of a noise fence, as one was not required. The developer has fulfilled all other obligations under the subdivision agreement for which securities were required and these monies have been released. 3.3 In summary: i. it appears that the Purchase and Sale Agreements, contained the appropriate warning for lots 1 to 13 that sound levels may occasionally interfere with some of the activities of the dwelling occupants; ii. it also appears that the Purchase and Sale Agreements did not contain a clause regarding the defined amenity area; and iii. the location of the outdoor amenity was apparently reviewed with each purchaser at the pre-construction meeting. 4. CONCLUSION 4.1 In conclusion, the builder is not prepared to build a noise fence for lots 1 to 13 of 40M- 2419 or contribute financially to the construction of a noise fence. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Carlo Pellarin Attachments: Attachment 1 - PSD-072-13 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: George Franklin Courtice Homestead Land Corp. 18-24 ATTACHMENT 1 TO ADDENDEUM TO PSD-072-13 • 1 n Leading tf:e Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSEAND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: 25 November 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: PSD-072-13 File#: S-C-2007-0002 & 40M-2419 Subject: NOISE FENCE FOR LOTS ON WEST SIDE OF VIVIAN DRIVE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-072-13 be received; and 2 THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-072-13 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed b�: D id . Crome, MCIP, RPP Franklin Wu, Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer CP/df 19'November 2013 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40EMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 18-25 REPORT NO.: PSD-072-13 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 At the November 4 Council meeting-a letter was received from Mr. Franklin with respect to traffic levels on Trulls Road north of Nash Road and noise levels in the rear yards of the Vivian Street homes abutting the east side of Trulls Road. Following discussion on the correspondence Council requested a report from staff. 2. CORRESPONDENCE 2.1 In the letter dated October 24, 2013 Mr. Franklin states that the Purchase and Sale documentation, sales literature from Halminen Homes, title and other pertinent legal documentation have all been reviewed and they contain no reference to the front yard and/or veranda of the lot providing the required amenity area. Nor do the residents recall being verbally informed of this by any of the Halminen sales representatives. As a result Mr. Franklin's letter requests written evidence be provided whereby sales documents for lots 1-13, and the subdivision agreement inform purchasers of the front yard and/or veranda of the lot were providing amenity area as prescribed by the Ministry of the Environment. The letter also requests a second sound study be undertaken when the Trulls Road reconstruction is complete and an updated traffic study is undertaken in the Spring of 2014. 3. SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 3.1 Attachment 2 to the report contains excerpts from the subdivision agreement which is registered on title. The agreement identifies provisions and warning clauses related to noise to be included in the offers of purchase and sale for lots within the subdivision. Those provisions are summarized as follows: L Section 4.12 (20) identifies the noise report submitted in support of the plan of subdivision and that the Owner shall implement the recommendations therein; ii. Section 4.12 (21) Identifies that Owner shall, in the Purchase and Sale Agreement advise homeowners that in order to achieve acceptable'noise attenuation levels between 55 and 60 dBA, the outdoor amenity area for lots 1 — 13 is located in the front yard and/or veranda of the dwelling; iii. Section 4.12 (22) identifies different warning clauses related to noise to be inserted into offers of Purchase and Sale of various lots; and iv. Section 4.12 (24) identifies that a chain link fence will be located on the rear property line and that a cedar hedge is to be planted. Furthermore, it requires the Owner, through the Purchase and Sale Agreement to advise purchasers that they will be responsible for the maintenance of the cedar hedge (including watering, fertilizing and trimming) and shall not remove it. 18-26 REPORT NO.: PSD-072-13 PAGE 3 4. PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENTS 4.1 Staff contacted the builder to get copies of information provided to purchasers with regard .to noise and amenity space at the time of the initial sales. The builder has provided copies of Schedules "D-2"—Condition on Solicitor and Schedule "W" -Warning Clauses which were identified as part of their standard Purchase and Sale Agreements. Schedule "W" contains the warning clauses identified in the Noise Attenuation report and specified in Section 4.12 (20), (22) and part of(24) of the Subdivision Agreement. A warning clause related to Subsection 21 is not included. 4.2 The builder indicated that Schedule "D-2" provided opportunity for purchasers to have their solicitor review the agreement and its' obligations. In addition, the builder advised that at the preconstruction meeting with each purchaser a 'grade sheet' was prepared and reviewed for each property. Attachment 4 contains a typical grade sheet that the builder's representative advised they reviewed with each purchaser. In the case of Lots 1 to13 the grade sheet identifies a 56 m2 outdoor amenity area as being at the front of the dwelling and/or veranda. 5. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 6. CONCLUSION 6.1 The Municipal Law Enforcement staff of the Clerk's Department have reviewed the request to do a follow up noise monitoring in the spring once the Trulls Road reconstruction work is completed. Law enforcement staff will coordinate the monitoring with the Engineering Departments proposed spring traffic study.. 6.2 Subsection 4.12(21) of the Subdivision Agreement clearly identifies that the outdoor amenity area for Lots 1-13 is located in the front yard and/or veranda of the dwelling. The agreement is registered on title for any purchaser or their solicitor to review. 6.3 Based on the information provided, it appears that the Purchase and Sale Agreements warn that for Lots 1 to 13 sound levels exceed Ministry of the Environment criteria and said noise levels may interfere with activities of the dwelling occupants. However, it also appears that the Purchase and Sale Agreements did not contain the warning clause identified in Subsection 4.12(21) of the Subdivision Agreement, CONFORMITY WITH. STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable I I Staff Contact: Carlo Pellarin Attachments: Attachment 1 - Mr. Franklin's Correspondence dated October 24, 2013 Attachment 2 - Memorandum from A.S. Cannella dated September 24, 2013 Attachment 3 - Excerpts from Subdivision Agreement Attachment 4 - Builder's Purchase and Sale Information 18-27 REPORT NO.: PSD-072-13 PAGE 4 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: George Franklin Courtice Homestead Land Corp. 18-28 ATTACHMENT 1 TO REPORT PSD-072-13 0C'f 0 2013 1 pAUNIciPaLil`r OF cLARINGTON pLA I%G DEPARTMENT _ 1 yf jC.3�J M- M,ir� October 24,2013 3 ]ltiS CJUiI�:! O (.t:Nti;1L to Fii.E CFEC°!.^.rl I�;PJiildriilJF! Municipal Cleric C0;Y Director-Patti Barrie Q tt:vos co The Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street '�' c': ;'�' w a ONUS BOw!]1anValle, ON "CiU:S�.1!!;t 7 is:::liCIPhL C? ()FEPvIiIOiIS 1;1C 3A6 sirt'u.i �c..ra,s !i�PLtlt!'!itu I)K0L:W'--8 U TREASU°Y SciVICa Dear Ms, Barrie, MUNICIPAL W-RX'S FILE Re: Tzulls Road Noise and Traffio•Counts� Thank you for'the response to the letter and petition,of May 28, 2013 with the July 12, 2013,R,Albright to Vivian Street Residents;RE:Txulls Road Reconstruction Works- West Side of Vivian Drive Report No. -PSD-044-13. We would like to bring to your attention the following additional information Per a memo dated September 24,2013 from A.S. Cannella to the Mayor,.Members of Council-and F,AATu,a summary of the results of noise measurements taken at my property August 8-9, 2013 and determination traffic volumes on Trolls Road July 8-14, 2013 were provided, The*memo describes the noise levels attained during an approximately 24 hour period. and showed that ambient sound levels varied from 42.1 decibels (dB)to S2.6 Q.Traffic sound levels ranged from lows of 64.7 dB/79.2 dB to highs of 90.2 dB/99.7 dB. Typically,human speech is carried out between SS and 65 dB. The memo also provides an estimate of AADT of3800 vehicles per day on Trulls Road. from Vivian Drive to Billet Gate based upon a temporary radar board installed July 8 through 14,2013. The memo states though this time of year was not indicative of optimal(higher)traffic volume periods of the year to do such studies and hence another traffic count is planned for Spring of 2014, Another sound level study should also be conducted at this time again since the Trolls Road Re-construction Works, which commenced Fall 2013 should be complete as well. 18-29 With respect to an earlier document pertaining to sound levels for this development, namely Report No.:PSD-100-09,this document alluded to three possible means of noise abatement,namely a berm, an acoustic fence or utilization of the fiont(east)side of the dwellings abutting the east side of Trolls Road as an Outdoor Amenity Area(OAA). The berm option was ruled out due to interference with wetlands and realignment of the subdivision to the west and staff did not support the option of the OAA in the rear yard with an acoustic fence. This left the third option. Further actions were proposed by the developer in planting cedar hedges along the rear yards or the Trolls Road frontage, However, another document produced by D.G.Biddle&Associates Limited, Consulting Engineers discussed the noise level guidelines and criteria in the context of Ministry of Environment(MOE)requirements for Lots I through 13 on Vivian Drive, Section 2.1 Outdoor Amenity Space of this document states that if"these noise,,levels exceed 60 dBA, appropriate noise abatement measures such as acoustidal fences, berms, increased building setbacks or reorientation of dwelling units and lots must be employed to reduce noise levels." As described by the September 24,2013 memo,the limit of 60 dBA is clearly being exceeded. Section,4.2 Anticipated Noise Levels of the Biddle document outlines two options for the OAA. Option./was.-to locate the OAA atthe front of the dwelling and Option 2 was to locate the OAA in the rear yard and provide a noise attenuation fence/berm, Section 5,2 describes that in absence of mitigating measures,Lots 1-13 will exceed 60 dBA and recommends a 2.75 m acoustic fence running along the rear yards(OAAs)backing onto Trolls Road. This brings us back to the contents of the report PSD-044-13,namely Sections 2.2,2.3 and 2.7. These sections point to the layout of the lots being such that MOE requirements are met for OAAs on the front(east) side of the dwellings and that(See Section 23)the "subdivision agreement required the Owner to advise the purchasers of the 1.3 lots abutting Trolls Road "that in order to achieve acceptable noise attenuation levels,.. the outdoor amenity area is located in the front yard and/or veranda of the dwelling." The developer has recently confirmed that this did occur during closixzg of all the lots in question." Section 17 finlhex states "Based on the requirements of the subdivision agreement,the purchasers were advised that the front yard and/or veranda of the lot were providing amenity area," We have reviewed our Purchase of Sale documentation, sales literature from Hahninen Homes,title and other pertinent legal docrunentation and cannot find any reference to "the front yard and/or veranda of the lot were providing amenity area." Not can we recall being verbally informed of this case by any of the Halminen sales representatives. 18-30 Therefore, given the above, we would request that The traffic study to be performed as planned in Spring 2014 along with an additional sound study. That written evidence be provided whereby it was stipulated in the Owners (B'alminen Homes) sale%losing•documentation for)lots 1 through 13 and in the subdivision agreement informing purchasers of Lots 1 through 13 that the OAA was located in the front yard and/or veranda of the lot. Depending on the outcome of investigation into these aspects,it may.be that the Municipality and/or Owner(lalminen Homes) are liable for the removal of the existing chain link fence and the absorb the costs of the installation of a 2.75 m acoustic fence as per MOB guidelines. It is also to be remembered that the noise(e.g,, sound)ineasured as described in these documents is via decibels(dBs) and is based on a logarithmic,not a linear scale. For example, a difference-in 10 dB represents a difference of sound intensity of t0 times and is not simply an additive increase(or decrease)in 10 units of measurement, For example, the difference between 50 dB and 60 dB is the 60 dB sound being 10 times more intense than the 50 dB. .please find attached a petition,which has been signed by all residents cutxently residing along Vivian Drive in Courtice pertaining to the current vehicular noise reduction means provided between Trulls Road and properties located on Vivian Drive, Please provide a formal response to this request. 'Thank you for your attention on this matter, yours truly, G.Franklin cc Regional Councillor lvt, Novak(1 &2) Local Councillor J.Neal(1) 18-31 f Petition from Vivian Dr.Residents Lots 1-13) We,the undersigned,do hereby agree that based on the results of the noise measurements taken and with anticipated increase in volume of traffic that an acoustic fence would be the most logical barrier to improve noise reduction.The acoustic fence would need to be the maxim=um height in accordance with the by-law requirements_ Address Print Name mature -C:-:) e�� ��lct bum 5 j 15 � p F CO w N ATTACHMENT 2 TO REPORT PSD-072-13 M 1EM M 0 Lenriing the tYny TO: Mayor and Members of Council Frank Wu, C,A.O, FROM: A. S, Cannella, C,E.T. Director Engineering Services DATE: September 24, 2013 RE: TRULLS ROAD NOISE AND TRAFFIC COUNTS At the July 2, 2013 Council meeting, the following resolutions were passed by members of Council: Resolution #C-251.13 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Tralll THAT Staff be directed to: Perform noise measurements in Mr, Franklin's back yard, next to Mr, Franklin's patio door, Undertake a Traffic count on Trulls Road, and Coordinate,with Durham Region Police Service and the Engineering Services Department, the installation of a temporary radar sign on Trulls Road. "CARRIED" The Council resolution required responses from two different Departments but for the sake of simplicity, responses from both Departments have been included In this memo. CLERKS DEPARTMENT Staff attended at the residence to take sound readings on Thursday, August 8 between the hours of 4:00 pm and 5:00 pm and on Friday afternoon until 4:30 pm. The tests were conducted from the backyard of Mr. Franklin's property near his patio doors, On Thursday the wind was almost non-existent and the ambient background noise level was 42.1 decibels, During the hour that the officer was on site the sounds of passing traffic varied from a low of 64.7 dB to a high of 99.7 d13. This level was registered when a dump truck passed by the property. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTGN 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 C 3A6 T(906)623-3379 F(905)623-5506 18-33 Sage 2 of 2 TRULLS ROAD NOISE AND TRAFFIC COUNTS On Friday the wind had increased to between 16 and 22 km/h from the west, therefore blowing toward Franklin's property. The ambient level at the time was 52.6 dB. Noise readings varied from a low of 79.2 dB to a high of 90.2 dB. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT With respect to traffic counts on Trulls Road we would like to advise that traffic counts are generally undertaken during the period of March to June or September to November. These periods provide the most accurate data (generally the highest peak volumes) since they are not affected by vacations, weather or other reasons that may result in lower traffic volumes. Staff has scheduled a traffic count in the spring of 2014 on Trulls Road. What we can report this year however, is that the temporary radar message board was installed on Trulls Road during the period of July 8, 2013 to July 14, 2013. During that time the daily traffic on Trulls Road from Billett Gate to Vivian Drive was estimated to be AADT 3800 vehicles per day, based on the data collected. I trust that this answers the questions raised in Resolution #C-251-13 but encourage you to contact me directly should further Information be required. r Anthony S. Cannella Director of Engineering Services ASC/jb Cc; David Crome, Director of Planning Services Patti Barrie, Municipal Clerk CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINCTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO LtC 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F(906)623.6506 DN:H:wP61DATA/MEMO/MEM002/ 18-34 ATTACHMENT 3 TO REPORT PSD-072-13 THIS AGREEMENT*made in,quintuplicate,as of this 22�d day of J•uxy ,2010 BETWEEN: THE CO'RPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON -and- • COURTICE HOMESTEAD LAND CORP. SUBDIVISION AGRF;EMENT 18-35 Page 37 . fencing to be constructed in such a manner that the fence connects to and/or ties back into the dwelling unit exterior wall. The gate is to be designed and constructed in compliance with the recommendations and intent of the Noise ' Attenuation'Report.The maintenance of said fencing is the responsibility of the home owner/purchaser of said lot and/block,unless•otherwise noted within the ` Subdivision Agreement. 2. Chain link fencing w Where chain link fencing is a required feature between . any lot and/or block and a park, open space block or walkway, said chain(ink ' fencing is to be located on the public portion of the abutting lot and/or block in question and constructed in compliance with the'Municipal(ty's Design Criteria and Standard Drawings. The.maintenance of the chain link fencing is the responsibility of the Municipality, unless otherwise noted within the Subdivision Agreement, •3. Privacy fencing —Where privacy fencing is a required feature said privacy fencing is to be located on the shared properly line of the lots and/or blocks in questions and constructed in compliance with the•Municipality s Design Criteria and Standard Drawing's: The maintenance of the privacy fencing is the shared responsibility of the abutting home owners/purchasers of the lot and/or block in• questions,unless otherwise noted within the Subdivision Agreement. A notice acknowledging the following warning clause: 'The Purchaser acknowledges that the lot and/or block shall be graded by the purchaser's builder in accordance with plans approved by the Municipality of Clarington and that issues regarding quality of workmanship should be directed to the purchaser's builder..Such lot and/or block grading may be required to accommodate drainage;frorri surrounding lands and may include swales,'slopes, retaining'walls and where applicable sewers and- catchbasins. on easements. in' order to accommodate existing - constraints such as existing topography, existing physical features on adjacent lands the final grading design may vary from the Municipality's guidelines as' determined appropriate by the Director of Enoineering Services, The purchaser should be aware that these measures may limit the use of certain'areas of their-property and must satisfy themselves with respect to the final grading of their lot and/or block." The Owner acknowledges and agrees that the following warning clauses will be inserted into Offers of purchase and Sale of dwellings for the lots/blocks within the 40M-Plan as noted below: I) All waming clauses as recommended in the Noise Report in accordance with paragraph 4.10(2): "Due to the proximity of this plan to•Trulis Road purchasers should be aware that traffic noise may interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants," 18-36 Page 44 (15) The Owner,acknowledges and agrees to submit a detailed Tree Preservation Plan in'accordance with Section 4.1 of this agreement. The Tree Preservation Plan shall be consistent with the recommendatlon of the aforementioned Environmental, Impact•Study and the satisfaction of the' Municipality, of Clarington. Eurtherrriore,the Owner agrees that no trees shall be removed until such time as the plan has been approved except as authorized by the Municipality. (16) The Owner acknowledges and agrees to prepare a community education hand- book on the environmental sensitivity of this site, This document shill► be completed and approved by the Director of Planning SErvices'pdQr issuance of the first building permit. (17) The Owner acknowledges and agrees that prior to registration of any portion of the draft plan of subdivision'the owner must demonstrate how perpetual maintenance of any blocks (s) identified as "Part Lots or Blocks will be undertaken. All part lots will be pre-serviced with water, sanitary and storm sewers. (18) The Owner acknowledges and agrees to establish a geodetic benchmark in the vicinity of the,intersection of Trulls Road and Daiseyfieid Avenue, which will serve as vertical control for the proposed development. The Owner shall be 100%responsible for the cost of establishing this benchmark. . (19) The Owner acknowledges and agrees`to ensure that dwelling foundation are 0.5 metres above the 100 year HGL(Hydrologic Grade Line), (20) The Owner acknowledges and agrees to implement the recommendations of the "Noise lmpaot Study for Courtice Homestead Land Corp." revised June 2009 prepared by D. G Biddle&Associates Limited,'which specifies noise attenuation for this development. The Owner shall provide the Region with a copy of the subdivision agreement containing such provisions prior to final approval of the plan. (21) The Owner acknowledges and agrees to advise the homeowner of Lots 1 to 13 on 40M-Plant through the Agreement of Purchase and Salb, that in order to achieve acceptable noise attenuation-levels between, 56 and 60 dBA, as prescribed by the Ministry of Environment,the outdoor amenity area'is located in • ' the front yard and/or veranda of the dwelling. 18-37 _. Page 46 (22) Thb Owner acknowledges and agrees that the fallowing warning clauses will be inserted into the Agreement of Offers of Purchase and Sale of dwelling for the lots on the 40M Plan-within the Draft.Plan of Subdivision S-0-2007-0002 as noted below: o Lots 1 and 13 Clause#1 "Purchasers are advised that sound levels.due to increasing road traffic may occasionally interfere within some of the of the activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the Ministry of Environmenf s criteria." m Lots Ito10 Clause 412 `This dwelling unit has been fitted with a forced air heating system and the ducting, etc. was sized to accommodate central air conditioning by the occupant will allow•the windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby Insuring that the Indoor sound levels are within the Ministry'of Environments noise criteria, (Note: the location and Installatlon of the outdoor air conditioning devices should be done so'as to comply with noise criteria of MOE publication NPO-216, Residential Air Condrfloning Devises and thus minimize the holse Impacts both. on and in the immediate vicinity of the subject property)." o Lot 11 to 13 Clause#3 'This dwelling.unit has -been-supplied with'-a central air conditioning system which will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the lndOor sound levels are within the Ministry of Environments Noise Criteria. (23) The Owner shall acknowledges and agrees that prior to issuance of building permits for Lots 11, 12 and 13, the Owner will provide detailed•floor plans to determine the number of building components required for acoustic insulation factors and building materials,in accordance with the Noise Report,revised June 2009,prepared by D.G,Biddle,&Associates. (24) The Owner acknowledges and agrees to construct a 1•.2 metre high chain fence on the west, or,rear lot lines of Lots 1 to 1$,together with a 1-8 metre high cedar hedge, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services and Director of 18-38 ATTACHMENT 4 TO REPORT PSD-072-13 Schedule C- Condition on Sale of Property This agreement is conditional upon the sale of the Purchaser's property known as on or before If the aforesaid property is not sold within the above mentioned period then this agreement shall be null and void and the deposit shall be returned to the Purchaser without interest or deduction within the following 21 days provided the Vendor•has confirmation of receipt of such deposit. It is understood and agreed that the Vendor reserves the right to give the Purchaser 24 hours within which to remove the condition contained in this agreement as a result of the Vendor having received another acceptable offer to purchase the premises. Should the Purchaser not deliver to the Vendor within 24 hours of notice from the Vendor a confirmation in writing removing the said condition from the said agreement then this transaction shall be deemed to have been terminated and ended and the Vendor shall be free to sell the lands, Should the Purchaser deliver such notice removing the said condition then the patties hereto agree that the transaction shall be completed In accordance with the provisions of the agreement to the same extent as if the said condition never formed part of this agreement. Further to this,the Vendor may at his option extend the closing date to coincide with the closing date of the Purchaser's sale,or alternately,to allow time to construct the said dwelling, The Purchaser further agrees to list the said property thru the Builders Broker Nominee,Joe Hawco and Anita Halminen,Associate Brokers,REMAX First Realty Ltd.,Realtor,on the Multiple Listing Service within 72,hours of acceptance of this Agreement of Purchase&Sale,failing which this agreement shall become null and void and the Purchaser's deposit returned to htm in full without interest or deduction. Schedule D-1 - Condition on Financing This agreement is conditional until upon the purchaser(s)obtaining mortgage financing. Should the purchasers be unable to obtain mortgage financing by the above noted date,then this agreement shall become null and void and all deposit monles will be returned forthwith to the purchaser(s)in full without Interest or bonus. In the event that the purchaser is unable to arrange financing,the vendor may,at its option,take back or otherwise arrange the said financing,at the purchaser's expense. To waive this condition,the purchaser(s)must provide the Vendor with commitment letter(s)from their financial institution. Schedule D-2 - Condition on Solicitor This agreement of purchase and sale is conditional until upon the purchasers) reviewing this agreement with their lawyer.Should the purchaser(s)decide to cancel this agreement,they must notify the vendor by the above noted date,or this condition shall be deemed to be waived from.this agreement. 18-39 Schedule W—Warning Clause A notice acknowledging the following warning clause; 'The purchaser acknowledges that the lot and/or block shall be graded by the purchaser's builder In accordance with plans approved by the Municipality of Clarington and that issues regarding quality of workmanship should be directed to the purchaser's builder. Such lot and/or block grading may be required to accommodate drainage from surrounding lands and,may Include swales,slopes,retaining walls and where applicable sewers and catchbasins on easements.In order to accommodate existing adjacent lands the final grading design may vary from the Municipality of Clarington's guidelines as determined appropriate by the Director of Engineering Services.The purchaser should be aware that these measures may limit the use of certain areas of their property and must satisfy themselves with respect to the final grading of their lot and/or blook;" The Owner acknowledges and-agrees that the following warning clauses will be inserted Into Offers of Purchase and Sale of dwellings for the lots/blocks within the 40M-Plan as noted below" All warning clauses as recommended in the Noise Report in accordance with paragraph 4,10(2); 1• "Due to the proximity of this plan to Trulls Road purchasers should be aware that traffic noise may interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants." 2. "Purchasers and tenants notified that there are existing farming operations nearby and that they will not object, complain or seek legal action against such nuisances as noise and odour resulting from normal farming practices," 3. "Existing and potential future agricultural operations.are being conducted In the surrounding lands, in compliance with the Clarington Official Plan and zoning By-law, other municipal and regional by-laws and provincial legislation." 4. The owner acknowledges that they will be responsible for the rear yard cedar hedge, S. Lots 1 and 13 Clause#1 "Purchasers are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic may occasionally interfere within some of the activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the Ministry of Environment's criteria." 6. Lots 1 to 10 Clause `This dwelling unit has been fitted with a forced air heating system and the ducting, etc. was sized to accommodate central air conditioning by the occupant will allow the windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby insuring that the indoor sound levels are within the Ministry of Environment's noise criteria (Note;The location and Installation of the outdoor air conditioning devices should be done so as to comply with noise criteria of MOE publication NPC-216,Residential Air Conditioning Devices and thus minimize the noise Impacts both on and in the Immediate vicinity of the subject property)." 7. Lots 11 to 1$ Clause#3 "This dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the Ministry of Environment's Noise Criteria," 18-40 CIDI -P — Vfl/fAN DRIVE Pftposw STS Q f5.031 I m� 13958 , a i b8�m� hR}iATC}iE0 �� s UNDERSIDE OF FOOLING MAY HE 132-90 a } �� g LOWER THAN ELEVATION NOTED *� �*' a DUE TO EXIST. COND[T10NS. a EXACT DEPTH OF FOOTING TO rJQ'Jc :a 8E DENERMINED ON SITE DURING aV B N EXCAVATION FOR FOOTING. n ]/t ' 9j tR�l9f WS1 TiC.OD , e FIGURE I as .utM 140.50 F.FL FINISHED FOUNDATION T.8SHT W0.20 TYatr� gIN TFR wF1 AND T.F. TOP OF FOUNDATION t1N.DDRT Sw T57 137.88 vtstict3T.t:5 RAfN`rVATER LEADER LOCATION PLAN I FTOFIUNDEERRSDE of FT(; 123 R NUMBER 7R0 GRADfi E FLOOR zzz=:=vxova CABLE T.V. PEDESTAL BELL PEDESTAL UTT ' ' f HYDRANT :. 'team 1 N N § LMP POLE O p m 4ES ON EL + 5 If - 0 HYDRO TRANSFORMER m AM Wvz:INS 119,AmTJ 4)MS VZ4 ,�&&=OF IM DDmsroms E] ;&.D.er�tiis Tx�'is(os'c) �OMMM lwk own WiK FIGURE 2 NOTES: RAINWATER WELL DETAIL BUILDER TO VERIFY SER4CE CONNECDON INVERTS PRIOR PROP T 6m HIGH doa VINYL CWVN.LINK TO CONSTRt7Cnm FENCE ON PROPEf11Y LINE(C-507 BUILDER V O ENSURE 1.2. FOOTINGS TO BEAR qY UNDISTURBED NAME SOIL MUNICIPALITY CONSULTANTS DECLARATION: I HEREBY CERnFY THAT THE 8 ING LOT 5 40M- LEGEND TYPE.APPURTENANT GRADING,DRAINAGE AND SERVICING FOR TH7 LOT OF CLARFNGTON IS INu� VAIN THE c P STER�tIN p�T IH PR osAPPE ow� Q�ar ssfo 123.45 PROPOSED GRADE TO THE SUED VISION AGREWENT AND Y4ni A FOR BOTH O F 0.12.MIddla M Amisoclat a L.1mitad 123.4,5 E?ISnMG GRADE DRANAGE AND RELATIVE ELEVATIONS �QZ C O R 9 LJ 1 t I n g B fi g f [T 8 9 (` 8 DRAINAGE OF OAIE.L !S 29�n-..REV1ERt9 BY::._ f LL$.�ABSYfELL a 96 KING? STREET EAST•OSHAWA.ON LIH IDa 70NING INFORMATION PHONE ($05)576-SSOO• PAX (9O5)37S-3730 Z DRAM Br BK DRAMW NO, LOT AREA 484J9m -O'OL,VCf of 3,L&T. 1 .I 02 q C C7 BUILDER-HAU1—CE LOT COVERAGE T&0.25ti1 Z 33.SY. DA1E MARCH 28,2011 scAl� 1-250 l J VG l�-JI -5 SUBD' -CWRTICE HOMES'iF.A 2 • Leading the Way CLERK'S DEPARTMENT To: Mayor Foster and Members of Council From: Anne Greentree, Deputy Clerk Date: December 6, 2013 Subject: GENERAL PURPOSE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA — DECEMBER 9, 2013 — UPDATE File: C05.GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION Please be advised of the following amendments to the GPA agenda for the meeting to be held on Monday, December 9, 2013: A 16. DELEGATIONS See attached Final List. (Attachment #1) SOLICITOR'S DEPARTMENT (a) LGL- 012.13 — Forced Road — 4826 Concession Road 6, Newtonville Attached please find correspondence from Jo -Ann and Peter Mian, (Attachment #1) A e G"reentr e, puty Clerk AGlcf cc: F. Wu, Chief Administrative Officer Department Heads CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 -623 -3379 F 905- 623 -6506 Attachment #1 of Update Memo FINAL LIST OF DELEGATIONS GPA Meeting: December 9, 2013 (a) Sheila Hall, Executive Director, and Ron Robinson, President, Clarington Board of Trade, Regarding an Economic Update (b) Tim Johnston Regarding Report CSD- 010 -13 - Clarington Fitness Centre — Proposed Renovation [Unfinished Business 18 (a)] (c) Jo -Ann and Peter Mian Regarding Report LGL- 012 -13 Forced Road — 4826 Concession Road 6, Newtonville ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # From: JoPe Mian] Sent: December -06 -13 12;01 PM To: Barrie, Patti; MayorsExternalMaliGroup Subject: GENERAL. PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE- Report #; LGL -012- 13 Good morning Mr. Mayor, We were informed via email this morning at 9 :20atn of a GPA report that was prepared by the solicitor of the Municipality of Clarington and was available to us. We called the municipality to have this report emailed, which we received at loam. We were also advised of a deadline of 4pm today to file a delegation to speak to the matter. We are asking this issue be tabled to a later date, not on Monday, December 9th. We are unable in a matter of hours to clearly address this document, which appears at a glance to have many inaccuracies. We also had a conversation with Patti Barrie expressing our concern for the lack of time we were given to clearly review this report. Such a short notice does not allow us, nor our legal advisor to review and prepare for a Monday morning meeting. We ask that this matter be tabled no earlier than December 23rd, 2013. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Jo -Ann and Peter Mian r Application By: Port Darlington Land Corporation Proposed draft plan of subdivision, official plan amendment and rezoning to permit a 253- unit residential development S-C-2013-0002 COPA 2013-0002 ZBA 2013-0028 Clarington Planning Services Department Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision Proposed Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning Proposed Official Plan • Amendment Replacing the parkette block with a – low density residential designation; Adjusting the Type C arterial road – alignment where it meets East Beach Road; Reducing housing and population – targets for the neighbourhood; and Reducing the arterial road width and – eliminating the required centre median. Proposed Zoning By-law • Amendment To place lands in appropriate zones – to implement the proposed draft plan of subdivision. Comments PublicStaff •• Agencies • Public • Staff • Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT WATER TREATMENT PLANT Ij� .— .— ._.I�VCL. �1'RmaaLW. —Ee #Beach RmC_ Exa iry Eax Beach Rd to be clased�' - Li P'.P a Warm." Park I 11 „ p ,N Op sroy, 8roc1r3 Brock 6 ,. 0 33 ha - 3..N 9 '_I2.P6 na -S t 7 I■ . _- AP�RQVED PLAN :` «■ 5 -62-002 =002 I 1.0 o. st— Wafe,rsealry 81ock 9 ', I 1q• p60 ha -3.9 I' L tl • • ]I. I { t l41 < N1�k v ,rhPr 14 l 1 a =: Sf7E I PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN FOR PART OF LOTS 7 & B BROKEN FRONT CONCESSION MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REGIONAL MIINICIPAUTY OF DURHAM lalnl� ■«.: 6'MfR'S @li AEMRY [ I 1 I I d � PORT DARLINGTON (West) 01001k OP-1K Application By: Republic Live Inc. Proposed Clarington Official Plan Amendment and rezoning to allow camping and ancillary uses COPA 2013-0004 ZBA 2013-0016 Clarington Planning Services Department Ensure Maps are extended Subject Lands to full screen. CTMP Natural Heritage Features Background Event Area Subject Lands Comments Feedback • from Public Agency • comments Staff • comments Planning Subject Lands Mosport Tourism Node Comments Lands adjacent to • Tourism Node Lands designated • General Agricultural, Natural Linkage, Environmental Protection Clarington Official Plan • polices do not permit requested camping use Conclusion Ensure Maps are extended Subject Lands to full screen. CTMP Natural Heritage Features What is the proposed land use? Key Concerns: Objectives of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan intensity recreational use in the ORMCP? Is this a low Management Issues Comparison of Management Practices Management Issues Identified: Recommendations to Address Summary of Issues with Proposed Use Recommendat ions to Address Management Issues Identified: 1) Limit admittance to 19 years of age and over. 2) Increase the size of campsites, 4 campers per site- no camping /cars /privies in ORM buffer areas. 3) Restrict campers access to cars, no off -road vehicles (trucks included) to reduce drinking and driving liability. 4) Consult with rural residents concerning traffic management, and /or include them on the committee. 5) Implement the traffic study recommendations. Recommendations continued.... 6) Encourage carpooling, provide shuttles to hotels, grocery stores and parking lots in town to increase safety while supporting economic development. 7) Increase police security, search persons and vehicles upon admittance, provide random hourly patrols at night, police officers for emergency management onsite 24 hrs. 8) Sanitation follow Durham Public Health, # of privies and hand wash stations (M /F), less than 10% provided in 2013 - daily pump out and solid waste removal, provide recycling. Simmary of Issues with Roposed Use 1) Conformity with ORMCP- land use 2) Density of Use- land use 3) Management of Event — health and safety Planit Connections Consulting Inc. Photos of Boots & Hearts Concert 2013 from Rob Whitehead 1 I t y 4 � f w if#, Ev"'I 40 Ar A 4 i rjiL- < I r .r. �. r . _ -•- J A , ' ' `� + � _ s i R i __j � - `J L 46 . . } �r • I ,.. ♦• w. row V ' � jj. ♦ .` t ♦ - wp-� l It `, 1. - +- .`` � ;� v. ��"������'�''�.�''s, �;, _:..• - - � - - L. , '��tii 'sc-st Ji6`c•.�;+'�t"'� L.w 4�} "_,•� s•,�L... �� �.r. - J.fiiS .. _� _ R :;'7 _.- .r_�'� _ - ? "iii'•+ ti..S. :t' L -, z `� � fir: 4 �. � - � - a_ •, � _ c. ' ' .V' ..1c •. �.- • . t "- - irk lw AV 0� ,:,�_ r-- s r` 4 �,�'. � � /� ���/'` � '� �d � .1 �� '�•. i��t iJ r P • y f awl• F 'Poo C 1 ti 4' }_. `�J .. c:. �. !4 e4 b. "Al r�r . ,b`i .. -' - _ - _ . 40 4 # •r.LI- AMU F Ls r CRIIRD1Rl1 TIRE* MOTOI?5I�OIZ�T PF1I1K'"° TURN RIGHT 150m_ a� m. I i t t •r LHIIHUIHII linc v AMA3 § "-Mal=A3"-r Ti tom Qlr.,HT 15OM #A&I-IM -. .. 0.._ i- -,. 0 JA . _. r... quaff 1 Martin Road Bowmanville Application By: 668390 Ontario Ltd. (Kaitlin Corporation) APPLICATIONS FOR AN OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING TO PERMIT: A DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANT; – A RESTAURANT; – A BANK WITH A DRIVE-THROUGH; AND – TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS, ONE WITH GROUND FLOOR – RETAIL AND RESTAURANT USES Clarington Planning Services Department Garner B. Rickard Recreational Complex Church of Jesus Christ of Vacant Land Latter Day Saints Vacant Land East View West View Proposal Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law Clarington Official Plan Town Centre • Bowmanville West Town Centre Secondary Plan Office Commercial • Subject Site Zoning By-law Agricultural (A) Zone • BWTCSP Area Clarington Official Plan –Urban Design Public Submissions Comments Subject Site r ,�i6 Durham Highway 2 ZBA 2013 -00 Zoning By -law Arne COPA 2013 -0 Clarington Official Plan I> iture Prince William Boulevard Ca c� r�- LO 0 ry M C 0 0) 'AAClarin ton Board of Trade and Office of Economic Development Ron Robinson Clarington Board of Trade President Fourth Quarter Report to Clarington Council Adrienne Windsor December 9, 2013 Vice-President Secretary Economic Development Lead Update Ron Collis Past President 13 New Leads Leslie Ray 3 Commercial/Retail Treasurer 2 Food Processing Barb Malone 0 Energy Director at Large 4 Manufacturing Barb Yezik 1 Pharma Director at Large 1 Recreation 0 Investment Dale Gibbons 2 Other Director at Large 24 Active follow up on previous leads Del Dykstra 19 No recent activity Director at Large 8 Closed files Jennifer Knox Director at Large Tradeshows and conferences attended Laura Sciore Director at Large 1 Energy Lawson Gay 1 Real Estate/Site Selection Director at Large 1 Commercial/Franchise 2 Food and Agri-business Katie Hennessy Newcastle Chamber 1 Healthcare recruitment Greg Lewis Lake Road Proiect: We are now working with Agent for the property to look at a new Newcastle 81A program being delivered through the Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Justin Barry Employment to explore having the site certified in their new site certification program. BowmanvilleBIA The biggest benefit to this is the province will actively market certified properties on Lisa Roy their investment website and in their travels. This site would not qualify without the Orono BIA investment and efforts of the Lake Road Extension Project. Lindsay Coolidge 5th Annual Energy Summit: 125 in attendance. We had a good mix of Nuclear Supply Post Secondary Advisor Chain and local business. Hosted at the Darlington Energy Complex, we had a great Don Rickard blend of speakers and received very positive feedback on the day. Agriculture Advisor Curry Clifford Municipal Advisor www.cbot.ca • info @cbot.ca • (905) 623-3106 f Clarington Board of Trade and Office of Economic Development Recent Fam Tour: November 291h, we hosted a Fam Tour to Race Mechanical, Detox Environmental and LapTech. Nuclear Company in 1100 Bennett Road: CBOT has been building a relationship with Atlantic Nuclear for over 3 years and have highlighted location options over this time. We are thrilled to see them finalize their decision to locate at 1100 Bennett Road and bring 25 new employees to the area. They will be in the building and operating in January. Hilltop occupation: Also thrilled that after years of working with the new property owner of the Hilltop, Stuttering Johns BBQ restaurant will be opening at this prime Courtice location. We are also working with a new enterprise to partner and take the basement portion of the building. www.cbot.ca • info @cbot.ca • (905) 623-3106 Squash in Clarington ATTN: Community Relations On Behalf of the Clarington Squash Club Squash in Clarington CS-9-81 Clarington> C11 Reports to Council/Committee> Staff Reports> 1981> CS-9-81 Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington CS-03-85 Clarington> C11 Reports to Council/Committee> Staff Reports> 1985> CS-03-85 Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington CS-44-90 Clarington> C11 Reports to Council/Committee> Staff Reports> 1990> CS-44-90 Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington CS-27-95 Clarington> C11 Reports to Council/Committee> Staff Reports> 1995> CS-27-95 Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington CSD-010-13 Clarington> C11 Reports to Council/Committee> Staff Reports> _2013> CSD-010-13 Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Clarington Squash in Oshawa Squash in Oshawa Presented by: Barry Bryan Associates Architects, Engineers, Project Managers The Process Obtained & Reviewed Existing Building  Conditions/Construction Held Series of Staff Meetings  Meetings with Key Stakeholders  Public Meetings  1.Introduced the Project/Reviewed Project Objectives 2.Obtained Input to Guide Concept Designs, Obtained Feedback on Concepts Developed Preliminary Concepts with Comparative  Budget Estimates Project Objectives Extended Building Life  Enhanced Programming Use  Barrier Free Accessibility  Improved Male & Female Change Rooms  New Accessible Family Change Room  Improved Public Viewing –Pool & Squash Courts  Improved Squash Amenities  Introduction of Natural Light  Project Objectives Upgrade Electrical Service  Life Safety Upgrades  Upgraded Pool Filtration/Circulation  Roofing Replacement  Plumbing Fixture Upgrades  Domestic Hot Water Upgrades  Replacement of Aged HVAC and Dehumidifcation  Renewed Interior Finishes  Energy Efficient Light Fixtures  Project Challenges/Restraints Existing Site –Limited Expansion Space Project Challenges/Restraints Existing Building Structure Main Support Structure –Load Bearing Masonry  Precast Concrete Floor and Roof Framing  Limited Flexibility at Reasonable Cost  Project Challenges/Restraints Existing Building Systems are at End of Life Cycle  Small Expansions/Renovations Drive Up Cost  Striving For a Reasonable Budget  The Schemes 3 Schemes Addressing Various Preferences and Priorities Teaching Pool Expansion$4,400,000  Squash Court Expansion$4,200,000  Teaching Pool $5,400,000  /Squash Court Expansion Further Study Led to Another Option Basic Amenities Option$3,052,000  Summary Schemes Developed with Input From Staff,  Interest Groups/Users and Public The Schemes Address Various Priorities at  Different Costs The Next Step is to Obtain Council Approval of a  Preferred Scheme Final Designs  Tender  Plan and Complete Construction to Minimize  Recreation Centre Downtime Questions & Answers r = -r t .- _ .. n - p i t Ao +L po ON'Ll C 2L7. Canada kil TF do 1i t l • x it V � �.w it, , .w �_.:� ._ i {' _' �' L�'. _�. � _ i. 4 a f,� EN 0